MC2: A cryptocurrency based on a hybrid PoW/PoS system

[RandyMagnum]

Okay, so in regards to the discussion on syndicates, cabals, and other entities to control mining, let me throw something out there:

It would potentially make sense to do this in such a way as to heavily dissuade people from gaming the coin. As the value of the coin grows, the desire for malevolent mining may persist. What I mean by that is that with LTC, we see huge daily attacks of botnets every 12hrs, that add 1-2 or more GH to network traffic. Going after botnets will ensure that the system is less prone to 51% attacks (which I think could easily be done with some huge botnets if MC2/NTC is profitable).

So I think that it may behoove the coin to quasi-regulate pools and syndicates to ensure they aren't using botnets to mine with. I'm unsure how you could specifically regulate this, but I think it would be very important for the development of the coin.

Having said that, I am biased. I'm working on a very large GPU mining farm, and look forward to mining MC2. But I do think that if the system is truly ASIC-resistant, there will be huge incentives for botnets to commit a very large amount of power to the network, which isn't good for miners - farms, co-ops, syndicates, or individuals.

I'm not for/against what you've written, but want to add that pool ops can tell if a miner is using a botnet. The ethics involved in allowing such users to mine is dubious, at best.  There are many pool ops that allow this b/c they keep their pool hash up, block discovery up, and...you guessed it, fee revenue up. Even if a pool doesn't charge fees, a botnet typically provides enough hashrate to significantly reduce block-discovery time, therefore enticing other miners to register; increasing the odds of donations.

[1714146842]

1714146842

[1714146842]

1714146842

[1714146842]

1714146842

[cunicula]

Hey everyone, Wiki is up! Sorry if it's a bit crude, we're still looking at extensions. Any recommendations are welcome!

Great. I began adding some pages. They are works in progress, so pardon the mess.

I hope this resource can achieve a broad scope useful to the entire altcoin community.

Hopefully this will contribute to Netcoin's intellectual credibility.

[_ingsoc]

Hey everyone, Wiki is up! Sorry if it's a bit crude, we're still looking at extensions. Any recommendations are welcome!

Great. I began adding some pages. They are works in progress, so pardon the mess.

I hope this resource can achieve a broad scope useful to the entire altcoin community.

Hopefully this will contribute to Netcoin's intellectual credibility.

Great contribution! I think the what-why-how model works really well for what you've put up. I added some formatting for structure purposes to fill the blanks later. Really great stuff to read! Obviously we'd have to do a lot of editing to get the message right, but it's looking good so far.

[_ingsoc]

Hey everyone, Wiki is up! Sorry if it's a bit crude, we're still looking at extensions. Any recommendations are welcome!

Looks good, this was much, much needed ... and will contribute to the muchness of NTC!  

I added some information about democratic moderation to the main page, which I think captures the essence of what you added. I'm trying to mirror TacoTime's original words verbatim as much as I can, until he has some free time to tell me what I got wrong.

[_ingsoc]

Just looked at the Wiki and it's a great job so far!

I'm wondering in addition to those features mentioned, are there any other features that were in the thread that should be included but were neglected in the Wiki?

When Netcoin is launched, I want it to be unanimously seen as being superior to Bitcoin unlike the current Litecoin vs Bitcoin debates.

I want to get in touch with Meni Rosenfeld about his ideas on a hopping-proof method, which was touched on briefly here. I also want to get in touch with coblee about the model they followed for Litecoin's release. I think there's a lot of good information to be had out of a what-why-how approach to these issues and what Netcoin can learn from them.

[mcrimson]

What's the estimated date of launch for netcoin? Rough estimate even

[furuknap]

What's the estimated date of launch for netcoin? Rough estimate even

It hasn't been coded at all yet.

In other words, anywhere between right now and when the sun burns up. Roughly.

Seriously, you'll know in due time.

.b

[Benny1985]

I posted this over at the Platinum reserves forum, but thought it may get more traction here. It's about colored coins and dividing coins, as well as the issue that some people (including myself) have about a currency that, once popular, needs to ensure that the average person can understand how its divisible:

_________
I think the biggest bane of Bitcoin and other altcoins is the focus on the whole coin or Satoshi.

I think that everyday adoption of cryptocurrencies will be hard as long as we're looking at trading a whole coin to hundreds, thousands, or even tens of thousands of USD.

Comparatively, offering trillions of coins out there to ensure everyone has a whole coin may prove difficult to adopt, as the coin will be essentially worthless, with insanely large blocks, or incredibly fast blocks.

I really like the idea of colored coins. I think a huge focus of Netcoin needs to be in how we handle denominations. Instead of having a whole level (a single Netcoin) and a significant level of division (Satoshi), it'd make more sense to numerate in colors or properties, much like how in-game digital currency is held (example: World of Warcraft)

For example, in World of Warcraft, an advanced player may have hundreds of millions of coins on them at a given time, yet start out with one. Because there are three levels and colors of coins, it is easy to convert and understand the worth of each type of coin (gold, silver and bronze).

Likewise, there could be coins of various colors, that entail the value of a specific division of coinage.

For example, the highest value would be of those created when a block is found via PoS or PoW. Lets say its a grey coin. From there on, each hundredths' place is a new color coin.

I think it'd be very easy for people in the mainstream to understand. So if coinage ever becomes so valuable that 1 full Netcoin is equivalent to a million dollars, it doesn't matter, because one yellow Netcoin is worth $10,000, while a blue Netcoin is $100 dollars, and the green Netcoin is just $1. This way, its easy translate values of a coin, its properties, and network, without getting into the millionths' or billionths' place of a coin. This way, one can leverage the divisibility without the jargon of satoshis.

That way, you can have a small number of whole Netcoins be produced - say 10 million - but still have the intrinsic ability to divide the coin into 10 quadrillion base coins very easily, and a public that can understand each color's value in trades and transactions.

____

Hopefully this is an idea that can be considered. I think it would be revolutionary, and deal with some fundamental issues with divisibility. Network transactions and the like wouldn't have to really discern between the colors, but the public could easily know the types and values through the various wallet UIs.

[Nolo]

I posted this over at the Platinum reserves forum, but thought it may get more traction here. It's about colored coins and dividing coins, as well as the issue that some people (including myself) have about a currency that, once popular, needs to ensure that the average person can understand how its divisible:

_________
I think the biggest bane of Bitcoin and other altcoins is the focus on the whole coin or Satoshi.

I think that everyday adoption of cryptocurrencies will be hard as long as we're looking at trading a whole coin to hundreds, thousands, or even tens of thousands of USD.

Comparatively, offering trillions of coins out there to ensure everyone has a whole coin may prove difficult to adopt, as the coin will be essentially worthless, with insanely large blocks, or incredibly fast blocks.

I really like the idea of colored coins. I think a huge focus of Netcoin needs to be in how we handle denominations. Instead of having a whole level (a single Netcoin) and a significant level of division (Satoshi), it'd make more sense to numerate in colors or properties, much like how in-game digital currency is held (example: World of Warcraft)

For example, in World of Warcraft, an advanced player may have hundreds of millions of coins on them at a given time, yet start out with one. Because there are three levels and colors of coins, it is easy to convert and understand the worth of each type of coin (gold, silver and bronze).

Likewise, there could be coins of various colors, that entail the value of a specific division of coinage.

For example, the highest value would be of those created when a block is found via PoS or PoW. Lets say its a grey coin. From there on, each hundredths' place is a new color coin.

I think it'd be very easy for people in the mainstream to understand. So if coinage ever becomes so valuable that 1 full Netcoin is equivalent to a million dollars, it doesn't matter, because one yellow Netcoin is worth $10,000, while a blue Netcoin is $100 dollars, and the green Netcoin is just $1. This way, its easy translate values of a coin, its properties, and network, without getting into the millionths' or billionths' place of a coin. This way, one can leverage the divisibility without the jargon of satoshis.

That way, you can have a small number of whole Netcoins be produced - say 10 million - but still have the intrinsic ability to divide the coin into 10 quadrillion base coins very easily, and a public that can understand each color's value in trades and transactions.

____

Hopefully this is an idea that can be considered. I think it would be revolutionary, and deal with some fundamental issues with divisibility. Network transactions and the like wouldn't have to really discern between the colors, but the public could easily know the types and values through the various wallet UIs.

I think this is a great suggestion.  Would love to hear more from a technical aspect, as to how feasible this is in the implementation of a coin system such as this. 

[Luckybit]

I argued against that. I'm saying the social network makes the currency popular and the investment and mining syndicate make the currency profitable and that if the syndicate does not protect the social network which protects the currency then nothing protects the currency and no amount of technical feature can change that. Ultimately Netcoin will be protected by the Netcoin community and organizing to do this early on makes sense if it's supposed to last and be competitive because the Bitcoin community by that time will be elite and will not help other cryptocurrencies as you're seeing with the venture capital flowing into Bitcoin specific companies and Bitcoin specific technology leaving Litecoin and PPcoin to reinvent the wheel all over again for the benefit of those who own a lot of Bitcoins. That is the free market, but those who own a lot of Netcoins might want to have the same businesses, wallets and infrastructure in their community and it's not necessarily going to be a good idea or even possible to rely on Bitcoin businesses to support the Netcoin community because they might not own any Netcoins and could easily decide against it and then what? No online wallets? No debit cards? No exchanges? None of the essential sites that make market cap go up?

Hey Lucky,

I really appreciate the valuable insight that you offer here. The points that you suggest are excellent and I feel that we do definitely need to develop a social network. Do you have any thoughts or plans as to how to develop this aspect?

My opinion or idea is to launch a social network along with the coin and tie it into the IPO somehow. So let's say the IPO takes place and early investors pledge money to get early coins or whatever tacotime decides? Well my idea is to either encourage or require they join the social network as part of the process of receiving the return on their investment.

At first I was thinking a newsletter of mailing list but then I thought why not take it all the way? An entire social network should be formed. The coin is also called Netcoin so it just seems to make sense that Netcoin should be the first coin to come with a social network as part of the package. The only way to join the social network would be to have Netcoins.

Each member of the network would need a Netcoin address and would have to deposit a certain amount into the social network. The social network could be the public face of the Netcoin syndicate. On the social network site individuals will be able to buy software and products. On the backend would be an SQL or superior database, with search capabilities, the capabilities of analysis. On the business end there would be the ability of individuals on the social network to buy shares in various Netcoin businesses, form a web of trust based on friendships and personal relations, etc. At the same time it would be a good idea to not just have a Netcoin specific social network but also bring it onto Facebook somehow.

At some point it's going to be essential that social networks become part of the equation. Forums are not the place to do business, or to set up businesses. Social networking sites are much better for these purposes. If for instance a bunch of investors all members of the syndicate decide to form a group on the social network site then investors in that group can focus just on that specific problem. Build the exchanges into the social network as well where if the user has an account with the social network then they can use that account on different exchanges.

But this is not exactly something I'm in a position to implement. I'm an idea guy but I do not have the funds to implement this, it would be something I think would have to be implemented prior to the launch though so that near the launch the social network site can go live. Immediately after the launch when individuals have Netcoins then just charge a membership fee in Netcoins and that will fund the social network until there are enough businesses and users for advertising to fund it.

[Luckybit]

What's the estimated date of launch for netcoin? Rough estimate even

This is the R&D phase. But I think the goal is to make this coin not just an alt-coin but a potential successor to Bitcoin. Part of the reason to put a social network in place prior to launch and collect email addresses for pre-registration is to have a mechanism to determine just how interested the community is. You can track this by collecting email addresses. A social network site gives you even more data about the community which you serve. It can let you know exactly what sort of businesses need to be started and how much demand there is for them. Also it gives you a way to distribute information such as talking points should there be a need for political activism or just warnings to protect the network in the form of a PSA.

Finally and perhaps the most important possible function of a social network and of the R&D phase is to actually attract the smartest minds in the cryptocurrency community to Netcoin, then set up a wiki where the best ideas and solutions from those minds are organized, then after all of this is set up begin coding and starting businesses around those ideas and solutions.

Research and development also requires some level of testing, so there will be a testing phase to see how well certain experimental ideas can work. Like for instance there is a debate amongst this thread about whether or not there should be a cap and how many coins there should be total. I say there should be 11 million or less total to avoid inflating cryptocurrencies in general and to make it more deflationary than Bitcoin (because I favor deflationary currencies as an innovation over fiat). This is currently being debated as we speak and there are several mathematical models which show you can have an unlimited total number of coins and have it sill be deflationary if the inflation rate is very slow which has the affect of producing short term scarcity even if in the long term it's an unlimited supply. The purpose of a cap is just because that mechanism is easier to understand, you don't have to analyze graphs and complex models to determine what will happen if I say there will only be 11 million coins total, you know exactly what will happen.

Now if I say there will be an infinite amount of coins total, but that the inflation rate will never be more than 5% at any given time, what you might not know is that the inflation rate is actually more important than the total number. If two coins have a total number of 11 million coins but coin A is inflating at 50% while coin B is inflating at 5% a year then coin B is far more scarce than coin A and will take a much longer time to reach 11 million. This would mean the price would be far higher for coin B if the market caps were equal. But miners like to get a lot of coins, they might not mine the coin due to psychology.

So here is how I think about it, I say I'm smart but there are many smart people in the community and there might be people smarter than me. I say we should start identifying what we want from this coin. As an investor I want the coin to be as scarce as possible, meaning if I trade my Bitcoins for it I want to know that someday a Netcoin will be worth twice what a Bitcoin will be worth based on mathematics and psychology. If I don't fully believe this will happen I will not be making that trade, especially during the time when Bitcoins could be $1000 each and rising. So basically Netcoin has to be a better gold than Bitcoin at least, in order to appeal to investors. To appeal to miners it offers some ASIC resistance and other features to distinguish it from Bitcoin and from Litecoin. To appeal to technologists the inflation rate may actually be adjustable by the community but once again this would be why a syndicate would have to be formed early along with a social network.

Overall, let's set the goal to make Netcoin better than all the other coins in as many areas as possible by identifying the strengths and weaknesses of each coin. I believe scarcity and deflationary mechanisms are a strength for a coin to have but I also recognize that putting a total cap on the coin is not the only way to do it. I think ASIC resistance doesn't really appeal to me as much as a miner because I don't really think it will stop the mining farms and cloud mining from private entities, which is why I would think a syndicate would have to form. That problem is actually very hard to solve and the best idea I had was to randomize the algorithm so that no one knows which algorithm kicks in at which time of day forcing everyone to mine at all times to wait for the difficulty to fall for their particular device. 

On the wiki can we set up a page where details of the technical problems are mentioned along with the proposed solutions? Also a list of desired features that people want which appeals to different demographics? Such as a category for investors on the wiki with a list of features which appeals to them and then for miners with a list of features which appeals to them and then a mathematics section where people can look deeper into the different theories of inflation, deflation and different formulas involving that complete with the pros and cons from the proponents of the different strategies?

[Luckybit]

I argued against that. I'm saying the social network makes the currency popular and the investment and mining syndicate make the currency profitable and that if the syndicate does not protect the social network which protects the currency then nothing protects the currency and no amount of technical feature can change that. Ultimately Netcoin will be protected by the Netcoin community and organizing to do this early on makes sense if it's supposed to last and be competitive because the Bitcoin community by that time will be elite and will not help other cryptocurrencies as you're seeing with the venture capital flowing into Bitcoin specific companies and Bitcoin specific technology leaving Litecoin and PPcoin to reinvent the wheel all over again for the benefit of those who own a lot of Bitcoins. That is the free market, but those who own a lot of Netcoins might want to have the same businesses, wallets and infrastructure in their community and it's not necessarily going to be a good idea or even possible to rely on Bitcoin businesses to support the Netcoin community because they might not own any Netcoins and could easily decide against it and then what? No online wallets? No debit cards? No exchanges? None of the essential sites that make market cap go up?

Hey Lucky,

I really appreciate the valuable insight that you offer here. The points that you suggest are excellent and I feel that we do definitely need to develop a social network. Do you have any thoughts or plans as to how to develop this aspect?

My opinion or idea is to launch a social network along with the coin and tie it into the IPO somehow. So let's say the IPO takes place and early investors pledge money to get early coins or whatever tacotime decides? Well my idea is to either encourage or require they join the social network as part of the process of receiving the return on their investment.

At first I was thinking a newsletter of mailing list but then I thought why not take it all the way? An entire social network should be formed. The coin is also called Netcoin so it just seems to make sense that Netcoin should be the first coin to come with a social network as part of the package. The only way to join the social network would be to have Netcoins.

Each member of the network would need a Netcoin address and would have to deposit a certain amount into the social network. The social network could be the public face of the Netcoin syndicate. On the social network site individuals will be able to buy software and products. On the backend would be an SQL or superior database, with search capabilities, the capabilities of analysis. On the business end there would be the ability of individuals on the social network to buy shares in various Netcoin businesses, form a web of trust based on friendships and personal relations, etc. At the same time it would be a good idea to not just have a Netcoin specific social network but also bring it onto Facebook somehow.

At some point it's going to be essential that social networks become part of the equation. Forums are not the place to do business, or to set up businesses. Social networking sites are much better for these purposes. If for instance a bunch of investors all members of the syndicate decide to form a group on the social network site then investors in that group can focus just on that specific problem. Build the exchanges into the social network as well where if the user has an account with the social network then they can use that account on different exchanges.

But this is not exactly something I'm in a position to implement. I'm an idea guy but I do not have the funds to implement this, it would be something I think would have to be implemented prior to the launch though so that near the launch the social network site can go live. Immediately after the launch when individuals have Netcoins then just charge a membership fee in Netcoins and that will fund the social network until there are enough businesses and users for advertising to fund it.

Very interesting concept and much needed. Have you spoken to Taco about this at all? We can have a directory of business that accept NTC in the social network and maybe implement a Fiverr-like script where people can do gigs for NTC as well? Does that sound reasonable?

It does sound reasonable. Basically why can't we just upload a resume or something similar to the social network similar to how linkedin works and then the employer can review it and hire people with Netcoins? Like I need artwork for my website, and I have 500 Netcoins, so now I browse the Netcoin social network by searching for artists in the employment section or freelance section and suddenly there are profiles of many talented artists to choose from with porfolios of their work.

[RandyMagnum]

I hope to see a lot of these ideas come to fruition over the next year.  The ideas in this thread are piling up, some major undertakings. Hopefully other devs will step up and help in big ways so that Taco and the core devs can focus on the coin.

[pand70]

The colored coins concept in the OP is the same as the world of warcraft like colored coins idea Benny1985 described earlier?

[wtman]

One big disadvantage to crypto is the inability to buy crypto with credit cards.

If you could implement a system of assurance or disputing somehow, it will spur another level of mass adoption..

[aaaxn]

Is netcoin considering to change bitcoin input-output-scripts system with account balance ledger + min blockchain? If yes then I could put some design concept of such sytem in wiki. I'd really like to do it, but if you don't want such change I would only waste my time. What I mean is:

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=195275.0

[Hullabaloo]

I think the biggest bane of Bitcoin and other altcoins is the focus on the whole coin or Satoshi.

I think that everyday adoption of cryptocurrencies will be hard as long as we're looking at trading a whole coin to hundreds, thousands, or even tens of thousands of USD.

Comparatively, offering trillions of coins out there to ensure everyone has a whole coin may prove difficult to adopt, as the coin will be essentially worthless, with insanely large blocks, or incredibly fast blocks.

I really like the idea of colored coins. I think a huge focus of Netcoin needs to be in how we handle denominations. Instead of having a whole level (a single Netcoin) and a significant level of division (Satoshi), it'd make more sense to numerate in colors or properties, much like how in-game digital currency is held (example: World of Warcraft)

...

Hopefully this is an idea that can be considered. I think it would be revolutionary, and deal with some fundamental issues with divisibility. Network transactions and the like wouldn't have to really discern between the colors, but the public could easily know the types and values through the various wallet UIs.

You are right on the nose with the adoption problem. I've given this a thought and I think there's a way to make it all work in a way that's easy to explain to newcomers and might even have some advantages in day to day usage:

Dollars are used and traded like this:
XXXXXX.YY
Where X are whole dollars and Y are 1/10 or 1/100 of a dollar. Everyone learns this at a fairly young age and understands readily.

So why not display new cryptocoinage as
WWWWWWWW.ZZ
Where W are whole 'satoshi' with a a standard blockchain and Z the same coin but stored in either a quick blockchain or colored coin (the crypto meaning, not the artistic meaning) blockchain?  This way when you want to purchase something and you have, say... 23543256.43 NCC it means you can either buy a house with the whole part (a transaction where you don't mind waiting 10 mins - 1 hour) or buy groceries with the .43 part (where transactions are in the 10 s range)...

Easy to explain, easy to know when you need to transfer money to your 'fast' side - the only problem is the divisibility/value of the fast side, it might eventually need to go to 3 or more decimals...

...

With respect to the other main topic in this thread, I think the idea of starting the coin with a credit union (a better name than syndicate, honest!) rather than a federal reserve or central bank is an improvement... But with all the social stuff, there go your anonymous cryptocoins!

[Luckybit]

I argued against that. I'm saying the social network makes the currency popular and the investment and mining syndicate make the currency profitable and that if the syndicate does not protect the social network which protects the currency then nothing protects the currency and no amount of technical feature can change that. Ultimately Netcoin will be protected by the Netcoin community and organizing to do this early on makes sense if it's supposed to last and be competitive because the Bitcoin community by that time will be elite and will not help other cryptocurrencies as you're seeing with the venture capital flowing into Bitcoin specific companies and Bitcoin specific technology leaving Litecoin and PPcoin to reinvent the wheel all over again for the benefit of those who own a lot of Bitcoins. That is the free market, but those who own a lot of Netcoins might want to have the same businesses, wallets and infrastructure in their community and it's not necessarily going to be a good idea or even possible to rely on Bitcoin businesses to support the Netcoin community because they might not own any Netcoins and could easily decide against it and then what? No online wallets? No debit cards? No exchanges? None of the essential sites that make market cap go up?

Hey Lucky,

I really appreciate the valuable insight that you offer here. The points that you suggest are excellent and I feel that we do definitely need to develop a social network. Do you have any thoughts or plans as to how to develop this aspect?

My opinion or idea is to launch a social network along with the coin and tie it into the IPO somehow. So let's say the IPO takes place and early investors pledge money to get early coins or whatever tacotime decides? Well my idea is to either encourage or require they join the social network as part of the process of receiving the return on their investment.

At first I was thinking a newsletter of mailing list but then I thought why not take it all the way? An entire social network should be formed. The coin is also called Netcoin so it just seems to make sense that Netcoin should be the first coin to come with a social network as part of the package. The only way to join the social network would be to have Netcoins.

Each member of the network would need a Netcoin address and would have to deposit a certain amount into the social network. The social network could be the public face of the Netcoin syndicate. On the social network site individuals will be able to buy software and products. On the backend would be an SQL or superior database, with search capabilities, the capabilities of analysis. On the business end there would be the ability of individuals on the social network to buy shares in various Netcoin businesses, form a web of trust based on friendships and personal relations, etc. At the same time it would be a good idea to not just have a Netcoin specific social network but also bring it onto Facebook somehow.

At some point it's going to be essential that social networks become part of the equation. Forums are not the place to do business, or to set up businesses. Social networking sites are much better for these purposes. If for instance a bunch of investors all members of the syndicate decide to form a group on the social network site then investors in that group can focus just on that specific problem. Build the exchanges into the social network as well where if the user has an account with the social network then they can use that account on different exchanges.

But this is not exactly something I'm in a position to implement. I'm an idea guy but I do not have the funds to implement this, it would be something I think would have to be implemented prior to the launch though so that near the launch the social network site can go live. Immediately after the launch when individuals have Netcoins then just charge a membership fee in Netcoins and that will fund the social network until there are enough businesses and users for advertising to fund it.

Very interesting concept and much needed. Have you spoken to Taco about this at all? We can have a directory of business that accept NTC in the social network and maybe implement a Fiverr-like script where people can do gigs for NTC as well? Does that sound reasonable?

It does sound reasonable. Basically why can't we just upload a resume or something similar to the social network similar to how linkedin works and then the employer can review it and hire people with Netcoins? Like I need artwork for my website, and I have 500 Netcoins, so now I browse the Netcoin social network by searching for artists in the employment section or freelance section and suddenly there are profiles of many talented artists to choose from with porfolios of their work.

Oh, I really like the linked in style approach. We definitely need to incorporate something like this into the launch to ensure that there is mass adoption of this coin in addition to mining. Having something like this takes the strengths of Devcoin and improves upon it greatly. The flaw with Devcoin is that from my understanding is that the projects that are paid for are all licensed as open source. Sure, they are offering Devcoins for writing articles right now, but there is no purpose of these articles at all. People just write random articles on any topic and they get coins for it. Many people need freelancers to their own private content and this is the market that we should focus upon

However, if we go after the freelancer scene...such as Elance, or even the Warriors for Hire section at Warriorforum and use Netcoin as a payment form, this can be definitely something that is huge.

Other possible sites include:

Odesk
Freelancer
Guru
Demand Studios
iFreelance
People Per Hour
Freelance Switch Jobs
Journalism Jobs
Freelance Writing Gigs
Problogger Job Board
Freelance Writing Jobs
Rent A Coder
99Designs
Get A Coder
Smashing Jobs



We could allocate some funds for this as part of the IPO as I think that this is crucial to the success of Netcoin.

I think that the model behind those sites work fine. As far as content the only problem I have with Devcoin is it's only for programmers and writers, what about everyone else? I support the creative commons and I don't mind people writing about random subjects if it's eventually made into a wikipedia type site because it will become valuable over time just so long as it's organized. The point is people need to be driven to do legitimate activities other than black market stuff but make the same kind of money. So Devcoin gets it right that freelance writing has to pay $50-500 per share. They also get it right with the creative commons. I don't think Netcoin should force the creative commons but on any Netcoin endorsed wiki it should definitely be creative commons.

I mean Netcoin should have a wiki site perhaps focused on a very broad topic and then pay people to fill it in. How about an idea space wiki where people can write 1000 word essays and whitepapers on their ideas and get paid hundreds or thousands of dollars in Netcoin for each one? How about letting the viewers vote on them so that the top ideas, essays and white papers get bigger and bigger bonuses so that people can make tens of thousands of dollar off a whitepaper or well constructed idea?

I would title this the research and design wiki or r&d wiki or perhaps the Netcoin open scientific journal where anyone can research any topic and publish it then get paid for conducting the research. Particularly quality research would pay high amounts so that if the next Satoshi appears and shows up with a whitepaper or we get another brilliant colored coin type idea, the person who came up with the idea can get paid for their research thus encouraging them to research the next idea for the community. There should be the badge system which I talked about before and the medal system implemented as well so that individuals can earn prestige and not just coins.

We should also pay people to do more intense research such as network/node simulations, marketing research, psychological research, sociological research, and anything else.

This is better than Devtome where there are essays and poems but the scientific method is not encouraged and research isn't encouraged. I'm talking about an academic journal style publication funded by Netcoin investment for the benefit of the cryptocurrency community. Do this and Netcoin will secure itself and it's status early on because this is something which will attract all the brightest minds to Netcoin whether to read the wiki/journal or to make money conducting research to publish in it. Honestly I think this would be something which would make Aaron Swartz proud.

[Luckybit]

Also, what are your thoughts on this.

Note: If the mods feel this thread is more suited to the alt coin board then go ahead and move it. I placed it in this board because it's a technical project and here it will be seen by the right people. This topic just seems more relevant to this board because in the alt coin board it wont get much response and it will get washed away in a sea of stupid scamcoin threads.

What is this project all about?

A few months ago I started developing an idea for a new crypto-currency protocol which would solve the "blockchain bloat" problem once and for all by replacing the full blockchain with a finite "mini-blockchain". Such a system would offer many benefits including consistently fast synchronization times, much more block space, faster transactions, and lower fees. Certainly not an easy problem to solve, but if it could be solved we are looking at truly new and unique improvements over the Bitcoin protocol.

A few weeks ago I believe I finally cracked this problem and I quickly published a white paper explaining how the Bitcoin protocol could be modified and extended to support a mini-blockchain of a finite size. I also created a thread for discussion of the white paper to see if anyone could shoot it down. After a fair amount of feedback I'm now convinced the scheme is viable and I want to attempt an implementation.

In fact one member, digitalindustry, was so impressed by the idea that he started his own project to implement the mini-blockchain idea and merge it with the proof-of-stake concept used in Novacoin and PPCoin (I'm not really sure how those two coins differ). The reason I chose to start this project is mainly because digitalindustry and myself could not agree on important issues and I feel he's taking it in the wrong direction.

Most importantly there will be no pre-mine for any reason. Digitalindustry feels a pre-mine is needed for promotional reasons but that is nonsense because an alt coins which offers new features like this will not fail to be adopted. I feel that a natural and fair start is the best course of action because it gives the coin more credibility and ensures the stability of the coin in the long run. This project will attempt to minimize and exclude any controversial proposals and ideas.

The goal of this project is to implement the mini-blockchain protocol whilst staying as true to the original Bitcoin protocol as possible. That means no PoS implementation either. The PoS system is controversial in a way because it appears to make the rich richer over time and the benefits of such a system really aren't observable for a long time anyway. Not to mention my mini-blockchain proposal is already complicated enough as it is, keeping things simple is the key here.

So if you would like to get involved with implementing this scheme and you feel like my approach is wrong, you can join digitalindustry's project and help him implement my idea along with the PoS system and a promotional pre-mine. But that's not how I do things, I like to stick to the old beaten path and play it safe. The first group to implement this proposal will be rewarded for their hard work. We are talking about the next generation of crypto-currency here.

The next generation of crypto-currency?

What is the next generation of crypto-currency and what separates this project from any other alt coin? Most of you will agree that 95% of the alt coins out there are essentially pump and dump scams which offer nothing new or useful. I would personally say there are less than half a dozen alt coins which shouldn't be labeled scam coins; Namecoin, Devcoin, PPCoin, Novacoin, and Litecoin, and perhaps 1 or 2 other alt coins. I'm not so sure about PPCoin and Novacoin but they do offer new PoS features.

Litecoin doesn't really offer much beyond faster block confirmation speeds and scrypt-based mining, but since it was one of the first alt coins to offer these new features it has gained a genuine foothold in the crypto-currency market. Not only does this project offer a new coin with unseen features, but those new features are not small or trivial. Imagine always being able to download the blockchain within seconds or minutes as well as significantly faster transaction speeds.

Why am I making such a big deal of this? Well consider threads like this:
WARNING! Bitcoin will soon block small transaction outputs
New video: Why the blocksize limit keeps Bitcoin free and decentralized

All this concern over max block sizes, the SD "spam dust", the transaction capacity reaching its limit, all of this is nicely solved with a mini-blockchain + account tree implementation. Now I'm not saying Bitcoin is obsolete or outdated or that this new scheme will replace it, Bitcoin still has certain advantages over the mini-blockchain scheme and vice versa. However if this scheme turns out to work it does have the potential to seriously compete with bitcoin.

It was only a matter of time before someone was able to improve on the Bitcoin protocol and offer a new coin with highly desirable advantages over the original protocol, but I don't think that will mean the original will ever die out. Just because this scheme can offer more scalability and speed doesn't make it better as a tool for storing wealth. It does sort of make it better as a currency though, which is really what we should be aiming for I believe.

So how will the project be organized?

The first thing which needs to happen is we need to form a team of developers and create a repository to implement this scheme and see if it actually works before we do anything else like work on promotional activities. I know a fair amount of C++ myself but unfortunately my skills are much too amateur to work on the development of a crypto-currency. I need serious developers who know what they are doing and who have worked on similar projects in the past.

It will take developers with quite a deep understanding of the bitcoin protocol to make it happen, and you will also need to understand my mini-blockchain proposal properly. After we form a team with some core developers I wont play too much of a role. I don't claim to be an expert programmer and I don't really plan to lead the technical development but I will guide it along the path I think is best where ever I can. I prefer group consensus rather than acting as a dictator.

I understand that many of you may not want to work for free so I have set up a donation address (below) where anyone who wishes to support the development of this idea can donate to the cause. I will also pledge 5BTC out of my personal bitcoin stash towards the development of this project. If you wish to get involved with this project send me a PM or if you prefer just post to this thread. Hopefully I am not the only one who thinks this is a project worth undertaking.

Project Donation Address: 1AZjrg6h9nfvFt16kaszLTJkQi13kMwZz2

Another excellent idea. This is the kind of stuff which should go into an academic journal. The person who invented this should receive compensation and credit. The people who implement it would also have to be professional programmers, not amateurs. A lot of the time the academic or visionary types aren't necessarily good programmers but we still need to channel their brain power and compensate them. Also we need to document it all so that when the people want to build a new coin and need the latest research it's all there at that one site.

So perhaps let's start by taking the current Netcoin wiki and create an R&D section for experimental ideas like these. That would be the first step. Then when it's time to develop the coin the programmers can look to the wiki for all the brilliant ideas and proposals.

At some point tacotime will check the thread. He will be in a position to review all of this.

[_ingsoc]

These ideas are all really good and interesting. I would recommend that people write up their ideas in a structured form that others can easily understand, find, and compare against other ideas. Develop them into proper models. If you believe in your idea, write it up in a form that is suitable for peer-review. Judging by the first post, I think the idea was to get feedback on the coin itself, mostly technical to establish whether it is a valid proposition. Most of what has been posted here is auxiliary to that (services, conglomerates, etc.), and really warrant a different platform altogether. It's getting really confusing finding the technical discussion about the coin amidst all of this! So I think compact it into something people can digest and put it in the Netcoin Wiki in an organised way under an appropriate section. That would be my suggestion anyway!