Do you think "iamnotback" really has the" Bitcoin killer"?

[geopolisch]

What do you think?

I think the market is merely an aggregate of individuals. I think there is no requirement for each miner's fee vs orphan balance point to equal any others' for the market to create an aggregate equilibrium.

I think several parties would be well served by re-reading 'I, Pencil': https://fee.org/resources/i-pencil-audio-pdf-and-html/?gclid=Cj0KEQjwzd3GBRDks7SYuNHi3JEBEiQAIm6EIwYR2Fs9fOqpwy_2NVN1xOT4S8hBws9q6EnTWxCLAn4aAn8B8P8HAQ

I think the same suggestion could be made for “I want the earth and 5% more”, it is a marvelous story about the general economic history of the World showing from the side of the real market controllers instead of the public.

However it starts from early gold days well in the future, considering how accurate the estimations and the acts of the past with hindsight is a well critique of the market controllers I hope his future assumptions are emptied and wouldn’t come true, if they do, we are headed to basically financial doom.

[1714534248]

1714534248

[1714534248]

1714534248

[iamnotback]

Major confirmation of my plans and thesis...

Re: Miner cartel, Bankster cartel, or an altcoin? Your choice?

As expected, free banking has historically only worked for idealized scenarios for limited periods of time in only a few countries. For example, all those cases where it worked, all the bank notes traded at par, which is what I was asserting that people demand a single unit-of-account, and all cases had no significant interference by any outside force such as government or war. In essence for free banking to have any chance of working properly, government would need to remain benevolent all over the world (or there would not be a single global unit-of-account, i.e. not all notes would trade at par).

http://oll.libertyfund.org/titles/selgin-the-theory-of-free-banking-money-supply-under-competitive-note-issue#lf1544_head_007

So free banking is incompatible with a universal unit-of-account. And this is a very interesting insight, because I've noted that the plan of the globalists has been to create a high-powered money then have regional currencies float against the high-powered basket. Now I understand why. This is so the fractional reserve notes can be separate unit-of-account for each different governance regime, since governance will highly impact the quality of the fractional reserve system.

So this means if we want a globalized unit-of-account for the Internet then it can't be fractional reserve. A ha! This is all fitting in now with my theory of bifurcation of the currency system of the world with knowledge age money and industrial age money forking away from each other. So Bitcoin is the old world NWO money.

And so now I know what I am creating and why for my altcoin. And we are going to kick ass on Bitcoin.

[iamnotback]

Re: Miner cartel, Bankster cartel, or an altcoin? Your choice?

Some ground rules have to be explained so that readers can make sense of this, so they can clearly discern who is the idiot with inkblot comprehension skills.

1. Nash's theory of Ideal Money has as its very foundation, the absolute requirement that the standard money (aka the high valued settlement money) must be absolutely honest, impartial, and have a predictable schedule of debasement. If this requirement is not met, then the entire theory crumbles to sand, because for example as Nash explained, the system of national currencies we have now is non-informational because there is no honest, predictable standard value which can enable the information of the free market to anneal. In other words, a totally relative system is a circle jerk of the blind leading the blind (bad money measured against bad money). But we know already from our upthread analysis of Bitcoin that it is completely controlled by the whales, and thus there is no reason to believe it will forever remain honest. Rothschild controls Bitcoin and when he is ready in future when the entire world is dependent on this standard money, then he can start to do dishonest things with it and bring the world to Revelation with all the wealth of the world concentrated on the hill in Jerusalem, as predicted in the Bible. Everything is proceeding exactly as predicted, so it is very easy for me to discern what is happening.

2. The good currencies are destined to wipe out the bad currencies over time as the public and the free markets anneal to the survival-of-the-fittest wherein those systems which had employed the good money as their unit-of-account will have prospered. But this means a lot of pain in the interim time while old systems fight against the good money and there booms and busts in bad money regimes. The private banking in Bitcoin off chain LN will be beholden to the (regulations, central banks, etc) regions wherein they do business, unlike the Bitcoin on chain money which will be global money immune to regulation because of the nature of its regulation being the secure/immutable protocol of the blockchain (and this is a key point!). This is entirely my point that unleashing unregulated fractional reserve banking on off chain Bitcoin transactions denominated in BTC (at par) globally would cause extreme distress just as the Greece borrowing in Euros when their industrial productivity is not as high as Germany has bankrupted Greece. This is the 10 Kings stage of regional currencies as predicted in Revelation in the Bible. This is the pain and chaos that precedes the final stage when the entire world submits to a single world currency and the 666 mark on everyone's forehead, as mentioned for item #1 above.


Bitcoin is the NWO coin. It was created by Rothschild and he controls it behind the scenes.

Now my point is that during the 10 Kings stage, these regional currencies (e.g. the Yuan for the Asian Union) and any private banking "BTC" derivative notes issued within those regimes, will not be a global unit, because they will have failures which are independent of each other (because they are not on chain protocol enforced money). Thus my point is that during that period, the knowledge age economy which is already globalized and to a large extent ignores and is immune to regional regulation, will desire a unit-of-account which is global and protocol enforced on chain. I intend to provide this unit with my project and our money will diverge from Bitcoin's universe. We will bifurcate away from Bitcoin's old world economy which is trying to convert the legacy political and financial systems of the world to the Ideal Money. Instead we will go directly to Ideal Money enforced on chain and ours will be even better than Bitcoin because it will be deflationary instead of only 0% inflation.

And we will kick ass. Those who want to suffer and moan in pain will go with the banksters and their Bitcoin lie. It is a lie because of that I wrote in #1.

And I don't care what that idiot writes, because it should be now very clear he is an idiot who deserves his appointment with his future pain and suffering.

In the Bible it says that the Beast is wounded. I am telling you I think our work is what wounds the Beast.

[iamnotback]

Understand everything about money and why OpenShare will win.

And so now I have finally butted heads with the richest whale in Bitcoin.

ladixDev, this is for you. I hope you understand how we will win. Let's get busy coding and stop bloviating.  Make sure you deeply understand everything I have written in that thread for the past 2 days.

Understand everything about money and why OpenShare will win.

And so now I have finally butted heads with the richest whale in Bitcoin.

ladixDev, your heart wants a meritocracy. So let's go make one. Being angry or upset is not a plan. We have a plan.

Understand how everything is changing because we are leaving the fixed capital industrial age. You are still fighting the last war. Let's go fight the current war and we have the power. Coding is power. Use your power now to create meritocracy.

In as much as pleasing friends is done to augment your own happiness, that's still nothing else but selfish behaviour !

And it is not incongruent with unselfish behavior when we remove the Prisoner's dilemma of fungible money, which I think is roughly what Nash was trying to say.

Re: Miner cartel, Bankster cartel, or an altcoin? Your choice?

Our goal is fundamentally about removing the Prisoner's Dilemma that forms around lack of meritocracy due to rent seekers:

ladixDev, your heart wants a meritocracy. So let's go make one. Being angry or upset is not a plan. We have a plan.

Understand how everything is changing because we are leaving the fixed capital industrial age. You are still fighting the last war. Let's go fight the current war and we have the power. Coding is power. Use your power now to create meritocracy.

In as much as pleasing friends is done to augment your own happiness, that's still nothing else but selfish behaviour !

And it is not incongruent with unselfish behavior when we remove the Prisoner's dilemma of fungible money, which I think is roughly what Nash was trying to say.

It will be awhile I think be for someone with significant interest allows me to explain this: http://web.math.princeton.edu/jfnj/texts_and_graphics/Main.Content/An_Interesting_Equation_and_An_Interesting_Possibility/An_Interesting_Equation/Equation.general.vac/From.PennState/intereq.r.pdf

I'm curious about his 4th order model of space-time, but I don't have enough bandwidth to bite on that diversion right now.

It's true society would all benefit from an energy breakthrough, and it would interesting wouldn't it, if such a breakthrough was predicated on our procurement of Ideal Money technology?

I believe the energy breakthrough may have already been discovered. It is informational in nature. By reducing friction, we increase potential energy. I am contemplating that the Inverse Commons is more profound than we have yet explained.

[thejaytiesto]

I was reading the thread of mining cartel vs banking cartel etc where you and other very smart guys argue and I have a headache since that is too much academic stuff for me, and also my monitor is broken and im in some old ass 17 inch CRT going blind since i cant afford a new one for now.


Anyway something I noticed is how you basically claim bitcoin is doomed because whales control it.
My question is: how do you then pretend to stop the formation of whales in your coin?
From what I can gather you solved the entire PoW mining cartel thing cause there is no mining per se in your coin, not sure how that works but anyway, assuming that is the case and your coin is solid without the usual PoW (or other existing methods) problems, what about the whales then?

In every free market there are going to be whales since people expect big rewards by taking the big risk of being a really early investor of something (if it takes off and is a success). So what treats can whales pose?

Another question I have is, how does your project defend against someone with enough resources to convince enough people to support a fork of your coin and try to make this fork the "official OpenShare"? (similar situation we are seeing now with bitcoin where the other camp tries to take over and steal the brand)

I hope those question make sense it probably doesnt, i know i shouldnt be arguing about that since I have never read a book in my life but those are questions that come to me intuitively and since im involved in this I want to know as much as possible (not the same investing in cocacola than investing in cutting edge tech).

Also yes you should create a forum and so on. opensharetalk.com is registered. openshareforum.com is not that is a good one.

[iamnotback]

I was reading the thread of mining cartel vs banking cartel etc where you and other very smart guys argue and I have a headache since that is too much academic stuff for me, and also my monitor is broken and im in some old ass 17 inch CRT going blind since i cant afford a new one for now.

Those discussions are very technically detailed with deep game theory, economics theory, and blockchain expertise, thus it would be difficult to follow (even for myself if I had tried to read that in 2013). We could explain all that to you in simpler language if we had time to summarize it, but it isn't my priority right now to make sure everyone understands all those technical details. That discussion you referred to also made me exhausted. I have stopped that discussion now, as I convinced myself that OpenShare is absolutely needed for decentralized scaling on unlimited transactions, not just payment transactions but many of the decentralized database transactions on the Internet, such as replacing many of the websites you use now with a decentralized database including Facebook, StackExchange, Google Playstore, GitHub, etc..

You said you have 25 BTC and a 19" flatscreen sells for 0.15 BTC. I think given crypto investing is your current vocation, perhaps consider it a wise expense.

I can't guarantee it, but my read of the chart is that ETH will outperform BTC. Remember I told you and everyone I bought it at $45 a few days ago, and now it is $52.

XMR also looks like a solid speculation after recent pullback, especially on any pullback to $15 (I won't pull the trigger until that dip bcz I am satisfied with holding ETH).

Anyway something I noticed is how you basically claim bitcoin is doomed because whales control it.

My question is: how do you then pretend to stop the formation of whales in your coin?

From what I can gather you solved the entire PoW mining cartel thing cause there is no mining per se in your coin, not sure how that works but anyway, assuming that is the case and your coin is solid without the usual PoW (or other existing methods) problems, what about the whales then?

In every free market there are going to be whales since people expect big rewards by taking the big risk of being a really early investor of something (if it takes off and is a success). So what treats can whales pose?

For near-term protection of intellectual property reasons, I am not ready to reveal the specific design of the OpenShare blockchain and consensus algorithm, although it will all be revealed and open sourced eventually (we really need to accelerate the coding). Again, no ICO is planned, so I am not obscuring to try to trick any speculators.

But I can give you a general description for now, which might satiate your curiosity for the time being.

The OpenShare design doesn't attempt to prevent a power-law distribution of the tokens (i.e. whales) because that would not be possible to prevent. Power-law (or exponential) distribution of resources is the norm in nature. The tokens will be distributed to the app devs, users, and content producers, so we aren't necessarily distributing them to whales initially. The distribution will be meritocracy where those who receive tokens do so because of some objectively verifiable "work" they provided to the ecosystem. Speculators will have to buy them from those groups.

Instead the design (in theory) makes it impossible for the whales to force onto to the rest of the users what the protocol will be, and it makes it impossible for any node in the system to misbehave because the system objectively detects malevolence and routes around it without employing PoW. Think of my design as a hive of bees, that routes around obstacles or attacks and attacker. That hive acts as one brain, but no one can control it, because it isn't voting (and thus doesn't have the problem of voting). Contrast this with for example how the whales in Bitcoin can dominate the economic rewards of the blocks and then make sure only their approved miners get those rewards.

I don't want to try to characterize the difference in security comparing OpenShare vs. PoW, because I think my design is comparable in security, but this needs to be heavily peer reviewed because the game theory for new consensus designs is very complex. Really you should trust nothing until it has been heavily peer reviewed. But any way, when we launch there won't be a lot of value at stake and the peer review will come before there is a lot of value invested into the system.

Another question I have is, how does your project defend against someone with enough resources to convince enough people to support a fork of your coin and try to make this fork the "official OpenShare"? (similar situation we are seeing now with bitcoin where the other camp tries to take over and steal the brand)

That is why I won't make it open source immediately. Once we have say 10,000 users then we'll have enough of a lead. Once we reach critical mass of 10,000 users, we'll probably quickly reach 100,000 then a million. That assumes we have plenty of apps ready. So I am hoping we can interest some app developers to be in early on this. They will get so many tokens if they do and become likely very wealthy. If I have to write the initial apps myself, this won't get launched in 2017.

I want to get the forum operating asap so I can start working with app devs.

Also yes you should create a forum and so on. opensharetalk.com is registered. openshareforum.com is not that is a good one.

I was thinking just to put the forum on the main domain in a subdirectory or forum.opensha.re.


Did I answer your questions? Feedback is appreciated from readers.

(Note my forehead on keyboard sleepy while writing this so please excuse any errors in the prose)

[iamnotback]

The problem is that there is no such future for an investor regardless of longterm.  If bitcoin is to move in the direction of an optimal medium of exchange then eventually it will need to peel away from its digital gold quality as an inflation hedge.  There will be pressure to devalue it.  The reason there is little adoption of bitcoin right now is the steady increase in value encourages savings and not spending, its NOT because of the block-size problem.

The belief that you can raise the transaction per second to create a better investment for yourself is assbackwards thinking by people who don't have the ability to think beyond 1 level.

I am going to throw you another curve ball. What if the amount spent on transactions is very tiny compared to the savings piled into investment, but the economic value of those transactions is orders-of-magnitude more valuable than the investment in the tokens. This is very possible. Observe me show you how it is done with my project OpenShare.

I am going to throw you another curve ball. What if the amount spent on transactions is very tiny compared to the savings piled into investment, but the economic value of those transactions is orders-of-magnitude more valuable than the investment in the tokens. This is very possible. Observe me show you how it is done with my project OpenShare.

Why would someone spend or part with something that is increasing in value?

What part of trading miniscule transaction amounts for much larger value did you not understand?

The curve ball is that the value exchanged in non-fungible, i.e. isn't directly monetized. For example, paying 0.1 BTC per month to be able to publish your academic papers. The value enabled is much more than the value transferred monetarily. Now imagine blockchains open new markets of value which didn't exist before. Voila! Bitcoin destroyed. Watch it happen.

[iamnotback]

Is OpenShare a good name considering socialism is collapsing?

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/taxes/marxist-socialism-now-relabeled-as-the-sharing-economy/

[jbreher]

Is OpenShare a good name considering socialism is collapsing?

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/taxes/marxist-socialism-now-relabeled-as-the-sharing-economy/

Sorry. MA misunderstands the term 'sharing economy'. Look at his examples: accommodation sharing (e.g., AirBnB), ride sharing (e.g., Uber), music and video streaming (e.g., Spotify), online staffing (e.g., Fiverr), and peer/crowd funding (e.g., Kickstarter). None of these are namby-pamby unrenumerated sharing -- they are all strictly for-profit industries. Their common denominator is that they disintermediate gatekeepers to these industries -- hotel chains, taxi companies, record companies, employers, wall street, respectively -- by creating venues where producers and consumers can find each other (with reputation attached) through an inexpensive interface.

Looks like Canada is just trying to tax this direct income. While I'll pass on a discussion on the legitimacy of income tax in general at this juncture, if they have a legitimate power to tax traditional employment income, why would they not have a legitimate power to charge direct producer-to-consumer income?

[iamnotback]

Is OpenShare a good name considering socialism is collapsing?

https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/world-news/taxes/marxist-socialism-now-relabeled-as-the-sharing-economy/

Sorry. MA misunderstands the term 'sharing economy'. Look at his examples: accommodation sharing (e.g., AirBnB), ride sharing (e.g., Uber), music and video streaming (e.g., Spotify), online staffing (e.g., Fiverr), and peer/crowd funding (e.g., Kickstarter). None of these are namby-pamby unrenumerated sharing -- they are all strictly for-profit industries. Their common denominator is that they disintermediate gatekeepers to these industries -- hotel chains, taxi companies, record companies, employers, wall street, respectively -- by creating venues where producers and consumers can find each other (with reputation attached) through an inexpensive interface.

Looks like Canada is just trying to tax this direct income. While I'll pass on a discussion on the legitimacy of income tax in general at this juncture, if they have a legitimate power to tax traditional employment income, why would they not have a legitimate power to charge direct producer-to-consumer income?

You're correct. Thanks. I didn't click his link (so sleepy & rushed). I had heard of the sharing economy, but hadn't heard of a government using it to refer to a new totalitarianism, but apparently you are correct that the Canadian govt just wants to tax the sharing economy. Armstrong is mistakenly thinking the sharing economy is something the Canadian govt invented as a form of communism.

Nevertheless I am thinking the sharing economy might not be the best possible connotation and association to the generality of what we want to do with blockchains. And the sharing economy could end up being associated with communistic leanings as the global socialism heads into the cataclysmic abyss I estimate is ahead of us over the next decade or so. We're not just enabling sharing, but we are also enabling open coordination. We are providing the open database on a blockchain with the scalability to handle the Internet volume.

So with that in mind I registered a new alternative domain name (only cost me $5):

bitnet.cash

There was a wallet named Bitnet.io but it was bought out by Uphold and has been renamed or folded into Upload Merchant Services. So perhaps that domain name is even for sale.

The domains bitnet.net and bitnet.org are also for sale for several $1000s (for later).

So any preferences from any of you all between Openshare and Bitnet? I'd appreciate feedback asap as I am trying to get a forum going asap.

Bitnet is shorter and more well associated with Bitcoin branding. Note the recent pump of Bitcoin+ (Plus). And the 'bit' is for the database and the 'net' is for the Internet cloud aspect of it.

If we choose Bitnet, then we can make the token bits instead of shares. (I'm leaning towards Bitnet)

[Fatoshi]

I like the idea of rewarding 'work' but I wonder if average non tech guys like myself could be excluded and then you are back to the whole rewarding technically able like POW does but on steroids.

I wonder what 'work' a 'user' could do beyond sharing a photo or mindlessly clicking on likes etc. 


I'm personally a big fan of airdrops to spread a coin at least in part, in my opinion the best distribution will deploy a mixture of methods.

[IadixDev]

Understand everything about money and why OpenShare will win.

And so now I have finally butted heads with the richest whale in Bitcoin.

ladixDev, this is for you. I hope you understand how we will win. Let's get busy coding and stop bloviating.  Make sure you deeply understand everything I have written in that thread for the past 2 days.

Understand everything about money and why OpenShare will win.

And so now I have finally butted heads with the richest whale in Bitcoin.

ladixDev, your heart wants a meritocracy. So let's go make one. Being angry or upset is not a plan. We have a plan.

Understand how everything is changing because we are leaving the fixed capital industrial age. You are still fighting the last war. Let's go fight the current war and we have the power. Coding is power. Use your power now to create meritocracy.

ladixDev, your heart wants a meritocracy. So let's go make one. Being angry or upset is not a plan. We have a plan.

Understand how everything is changing because we are leaving the fixed capital industrial age. You are still fighting the last war. Let's go fight the current war and we have the power. Coding is power. Use your power now to create meritocracy.

Hello

For the moment the team is preparing the ICO, and it's not really in my hands for the moment, so i have bit of free time

For the development part, anyway for the moment i'm more focused on development distributed applications, with the modular system it can handle any blockchain protocol and connect to any blockchain, so i'm not so so concerned about one coin in particular, i think if bitcoin can gain good reputation it can be better for the world of crypto currency as a whole, so i can only wish all coins gain maximum of trust and value

The next thing i might be getting into though could be the script system, but it would be something very simple in my mind more something like a BASIC with mostly built functions that are call to module methods, the only thing it would really need is a way to declare json variable, and call to module function with these variable, with fixed function prototype like with javascript event handler with a single json object tree as parameter.

For the moment i have a system to add sur typing to json object like this

Code:

make_string(&pack_str, "{(\"payload\",0x0B000010)  (0x0B000800)\"header\":\"\", (0x0B004000)\"txs\":[");
cat_cstring(&pack_str, ","); }
cat_cstring(&pack_str, "{(\"tx\",0x0B008000)}");
cat_cstring(&pack_str, "], (0x0B800000)\"signature\":\"\"}");

you can see the definition of the built in type there

https://github.com/iadix/purenode/blob/master/libbase/include/tree.h

so it look like

{ ("key_name", TYPE) : value }

instead of just

{ "key_name" : value }

To add a surtyping to the key, it is useful for serialization, but it can also be used for OO like programming if certain module or function need to react to a specific type of object.

The script language doesn't even need a module definition, as they are module export, the framework can already load up the function address from the module and function name. And it's already cross compiler with a resolution of function name based on the declared decoration specific to the compiler used to compile it. Like this a module compiled with visual studio can import symbol from a module compîled with gcc , or vice versa, with unified function export name.

So the runtime can detect if the method exist or not, or could make script that can parse module exported function list, so for the moment the script language can remain very simple i think. Most function of looping and list processing can be handled by the framework in modules.

The only thing it would really need some good thinking on, is a system to easily generate html5/js template for most application, to make the development of distributed html5 application easy, and i see there are some discussion about this on your git, if you have idea that can be easily implemented, i'm all hear

As for collaboration, normally there is no special licensing on the the code or anything for the moment, it doesn't use any GPL code, with the modular design, it's made in sort that several person can develop their own module for their own app and only share the code in common.

I made it this the very beginning to have very low debugging time, as it's a system i developed for micro kernel operating system, it has to have zero exception/seg fault in the code, that was first very important requirement, even dealing with interupts, preemptive multi tasking, and high level application, with zero memory leak, the code had to be made in sort to avoid any low level fault, because they are very hard to debug in this kind of environment.

With this system of dynamic typing, all the information can be available at runtime, for debugging, even in very low layer of the code, it can still acess all the data structure of drivers, library and application, even from a bare metal exception, so it helps a lot with debugging as well with the modular design it's more easy to know where the code goes wrong and having debugging output.

So it's all made to make safe application quickly normally, and already can handle lot of the http/rpc/json protocol as well for audio streaming and html5 applications, for the moment the audio system is still based on centralization for certain things, because for cthe moment i don't see easy way to design perfectly decentralized design that can keep everything secure for all parts involved in music distribution, not that it's impossible, but to come up with something really useable in large scale, it cannot be done without funding.

For the nash thing, yeah as you say anything it's something that is just supposed to emerge by itself from the collective, the only reason why it's not supposed to be already there is because there are some anti ideal force at play or some lack of development in certain area of financial infrastructure, which is think blockchain can partially solve, i guess blockchain as world wide distributed decentralized system can be a good medium to test nash theories, but there is not anything special to do in the blockchain to make it happen normally =)


For blockchain themselve, i would be really in favor of adding some kind of identity metadata associated with addresses group, to have more possibility for trusted peer exchange, or even some kind of private cache of mempool shared between trusted entities, and some possibility to black list certain address on the network level, or to give possibly certain restriction that could be added by the protocol, or some warning about certain address or node that the user could bypass or not, i'm not sure i'm ideally all for 100% annonimity/ fungibility and i think the network also can have room for also private network, possible with an application layer above the blockchain protocol with other type of data than transactions.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AHzeP0WeKIA

[iamnotback]

I like the idea of rewarding 'work' but I wonder if average non tech guys like myself could be excluded and then you are back to the whole rewarding technically able like POW does but on steroids.

There will be a work that n00b users can do. The distribution is designed to onboard everyone. No Child Left Behind, lol.

Don't worry, they won't be able to easily dump this tokens on the market and depress the price. We'll have a 100 week lockup on tokens making them non-fungible, but they can be spent to app devs, yet remain locked up. 1% per week can be taken out as a fungible token. Everything is designed to make everyone think medium-term. No quick cash outs except for speculators have no limitations. The float will be extremely tight plus we will have the interest rate mechanism from Byteball to incentivize hodling but we will do it correctly (Byteball's is broken design).

I wonder what 'work' a 'user' could do beyond sharing a photo or mindlessly clicking on likes etc.  

If they are genuinely using the apps and thus driving advertising and other revenue plus viral sticky usership growth, then that is exactly what we want.

The app devs need to read up on gamification and we'll be working with them to help develop good monetization models. But the add developers are going to be taking the "in game" tokens that we give to the users for the work they do. It bootstraps an economy.

The onboarding is going to be as objective as we can make it. And it will involve data on the blockchain so it can be cross-verified by the public.

I'm personally a big fan of airdrops to spread a coin at least in part, in my opinion the best distribution will deploy a mixture of methods.

Agreed a mix. I will detail later, because I really don't want to give away all the designs until it is ready for launch.

What I need more feedback on now are the name choice, the types of apps, and helping motivate app developers.

We need a community. But what I need most right now are interaction with programmers. Yet all community interaction and ideas are welcome.

If no programmer want to help and earn tokens, then I guess I am going to be doing a lot of programming myself.

I am trying to select a forum and Q&A s/w now and get it setup.

I am hoping @ladixDev is serious because sounds like he might be a capable dev. Haven't looked at his code yet. He has a damn good taste in music (for targeting the Millennials). I hope I can do a music app with him. I really love music and we can monetize it because of our unique onboarding. I have many ideas. I am an idea machine.

A couple other devs have stopped by and I hope they didn't get discouraged. I prioritize who seems capable and motivated.

If we can execute the plans, we have a very good chance of being the next big thing in blockchains because of the concepts and designs I've worked on for 4 years in this space. And the talented devs that will be drawn to these designs once they are convinced of the importance. So devs who get in on the ground floor have the real chance of becoming multi-millionaires. My job is to get the blockchain done. I love to code apps and I am good at that, but i can't do everything. We need to get this launched asap.

Ideally I would have some help on the blockchain. Someone like Eric Raymond (IQ 160) would be fabulous, but we need funds for that. We don't need any funds for me, I have 10 BTC and I am living in the Philippines. We'll have some funds after launch when I can sell some of my tokens on the after markets to raise funds for hiring devs.

I have a gf who has 1000s of friends on Facebook (including many foreigners). Her friends have 1000s of friends. Etc.. This is the way you get something viral going. @ladixDev has many friends, etc.. We have to build a community that is excited about the project and believes it can change the world. I wouldn't be doing this if I didn't think it couldn't really accomplish something in the real adoption markets.

We need testnets, example apps, etc.. Talk is cheap. When people can see and touch something real, they get excited.


Note I made an edit on the prior page:

I think we also need a Q&A functionality, because for some topics the format of competing answers that are voted up or down is superior to a long-winded discussion. These Q&A form the basis of a Wiki.

[iamnotback]

For the moment the team is preparing the ICO, and it's not really in my hands for the moment, so i have bit of free time

Is your team is creating their own blockchain?

Is your team/company potentially interested in making an app for my blockchain?

Be frank. No worries. I will keep moving forward regardless who is on board or not on board.

Given ICOs, no one wants to work for real adoption any more. Everyone wants to cash out with some hype and BS. Its all speculation and no real world accomplishment. I am here to do real world work.

[IadixDev]

We need testnets, example apps, etc.. Talk is cheap. When people can see and touch something real, they get excited.

I already have most of the protocole implemented with the block explorer and html5 raytracing demo on the site

The only thing it really miss it the memory pool and good debuging / testing on the p2p network, with profiling , and why not adding Zlib comp, and also having all op code of bitcore script engine implemented, but I have already the basics, most of the op code dont seem to long to implement.

[IadixDev]

For the moment the team is preparing the ICO, and it's not really in my hands for the moment, so i have bit of free time

Is your team is creating their own blockchain?

Is your team/company potentially interested in making an app for my blockchain?

Be frank. No worries. I will keep moving forward regardless who is on board or not on board.

Given ICOs, no one wants to work for real adoption any more. Everyone wants to cash out with some hype and BS. Its all speculation and no real world accomplishment. I am here to do real world work.

In the plan we will probably be dealing with many different blockchain, either the one of existing crypto coins, our own app blockchain, or other blockchain created with our framework, or integrated in the framework with specific modules.

We are not really a company for the moment, my friend is musician

I dont think we have hard line with cooperation, idk what you have in mind ?

[IadixDev]

Given ICOs, no one wants to work for real adoption any more. Everyone wants to cash out with some hype and BS. Its all speculation and no real world accomplishment. I am here to do real world work.

I know you are not fond of ico, and I can understand why, but we have been thinking the pb in many ways, ICO are good model of funding, we can have some contact in the public funding things , or private investor, but it's clear to fund good independant project with open source based on blockchain it's still the best.

But I know what you mean too with the craze and the number of scam and all

Well can always try, if it works and can get good funding, it can already solve a lot of pb to quickly kick start commercial projects.

But the ico blockchain will not be the only focus of developpement, just maintaining it and integrating new functions in it when it make sense for this coin.

All what im talking about is already made and working and available on the git, with some bit of documentation on the site.

[iamnotback]

For the moment the team is preparing the ICO, and it's not really in my hands for the moment, so i have bit of free time

Is your team is creating their own blockchain?

Is your team/company potentially interested in making an app for my blockchain?

Be frank. No worries. I will keep moving forward regardless who is on board or not on board.

Given ICOs, no one wants to work for real adoption any more. Everyone wants to cash out with some hype and BS. Its all speculation and no real world accomplishment. I am here to do real world work.

In the plan we will probably be dealing with many different blockchain, either the one of existing crypto coins, our own app blockchain, or other blockchain created with our framework, or integrated in the framework with specific modules.

We are not really a company for the moment, my friend is musician

I dont think we have hard line with cooperation, idk what you have in mind ?

Are you two guys doing an ICO by yourselves? Are you organized on that? Or are you just in the "figuring it out" stage?

If you make your app available on my blockchain, then you get to earn tokens as if you did a second ICO. You can still do your other ICO for yourself and find some way to pay a dividend based on your revenues from my blockchain in addition to any other blockchains where you run your apps. But you don't need to make your own blockchain (and it surely won't be as good as mine and thus won't have as much economies-of-scale adoption, if my plans proceed as I hope they will). Diversify your options. Maximum division-of-labor says you should not try to make your own blockchain. That is a fundamental rule from economics that for maximum results, each expert should focus in their area of expertise.

But you might decide not to do an ICO initially and just build your app for my blockchain and keep all the future revenue for yourselves. If my blockchain ends up widely successful in adoption, you will earn a lot for yourselves by not sharing your revenue with another ICO. But we can't predict the future.

Edit: I see your 3rd msg. You said you may like an ICO to get some pre-funding and share risk with the speculators. That is okay for me. You decide that. Doesn't affect me. You can sell your tokens from my blockchain (1% per week) to pay dividend to your ICO holders. Or you can distribute tokens directly to them as a dividend, which is better.

I'm very sleepy. Will be back after sleeping...

[IadixDev]

The thing is in my idea, im doing a framework to deal with blockchain protocol, or build new blockchain easily, to extend easily the protocol, more than doing a monolithic code to handle one blockchain with hardcoded values. The same code/exe can handle different blockchain like multichain. With different config or module for each.

There is not even really any compile time definition of any type at all. All the protocole message template could be put in a json file and loaded at run-time.


https://github.com/iadix/purenode/blob/master/export/iadix.conf

All the code for block & tx validation is modularized, the code to handle key pair and signature, as well as the modules behind the http interface like block explorer and rpc server for web apps.

Different blockchain can be made with only very localized change to the code, and preferably via config file for easier integration with above layer.


If you want to build a block chain engine from scratch , with the feature you want, I dont think you can find better starting point, because ive looked in the same issues than you and didn't find anything that had all the good requirement.

But im being objective here, not specially trying to " sell my stuff because it's my stuff"  

I already have the whole type class like things working with an already fairly debugged framework, with implementation of flexible/modular blockchain engine.

After custom blockchain can be made with other protocol with different modules. And keep common code as much as possible  ( not whole git fork to change 3l ).

All code is very localized with low coupling. Even my gran ma can compile it.

I'm very sleepy. Will be back after sleeping...

Good night, sleep well 

[vapourminer]

So with that in mind I registered a new alternative domain name (only cost me $5):

bitnet.cash

There was a wallet named Bitnet.io but it was bought out by Uphold and has been renamed or folded into Upload Merchant Services. So perhaps that domain name is even for sale.

The domains bitnet.net and bitnet.org are also for sale for several $1000s (for later).

So any preferences from any of you all between Openshare and Bitnet? I'd appreciate feedback asap as I am trying to get a forum going asap.

Bitnet is shorter and more well associated with Bitcoin branding. Note the recent pump of Bitcoin+ (Plus). And the 'bit' is for the database and the 'net' is for the Internet cloud aspect of it.

If we choose Bitnet, then we can make the token bits instead of shares. (I'm leaning towards Bitnet)

bitnet. short, simple and to the point. instantly recognizable.

openshare has nothing to suggest blockchain tech. sounds like an openoffice module.