wingding (OP)
|
|
April 20, 2013, 03:07:32 PM |
|
I will create a forked chain of bitcoin to accomdate for broad adaptation. The only major change from the old chain is: Reward of 200 BTC per block for each new block - (never changed)- The chain will produce 10.5 million coins/year (which is far from enough to cause inflation)
- The clients (incl source) running the new fork will be made available well ahead of the fork
- All bitcoins created before the fork will by nature be contained in the new chain
|
|
|
|
btcmind
Member
Offline
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
|
|
April 20, 2013, 03:10:02 PM |
|
what problem does that solve?
|
|
|
|
FTWbitcoinFTW
|
|
April 20, 2013, 03:13:06 PM |
|
what problem does that solve?
Not be a early adopter ! Genius !
|
Lost coins only make everyone else's coins worth slightly more. Think of it as a donation to everyone. it has lots of buttery taste..
|
|
|
wingding (OP)
|
|
April 20, 2013, 03:23:46 PM |
|
what problem does that solve?
Not be a early adopter ! Genius ! If bitcoin is to become a true alternative currency, the amount of users will grow exponentially over next few years. It will not be possible to realize this when 'all' coins already are held by early adapters. Early adapters will anyway become rich if the new chain is successful.
|
|
|
|
Come-from-Beyond
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 2142
Merit: 1010
Newbie
|
|
April 20, 2013, 03:27:24 PM |
|
I will create a forked chain of bitcoin to accomdate for broad adaptation. The only major change from the old chain is: Reward of 200 BTC per block for each new block - (never changed)- The chain will produce 10.5 million coins/year (which is far from enough to cause inflation)
- The clients (incl source) running the new fork will be made available well ahead of the fork
- All bitcoins created before the fork will by nature be contained in the new chain
Count me in. Any deadlines set?
|
|
|
|
JimmiesForBitcoins
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 56
Merit: 0
|
|
April 20, 2013, 03:28:33 PM |
|
what problem does that solve?
I think a Keynesian would say... Lack of credit expansion? By creating a decentralized analogue to a central bank? I guess I could see it working (though less efficiently than Bitcoin) due to the fact that people will use a fiat currency. Theoretically, as long as people would accept it in exchange for goods and services, then it would work by definition. The target inflation rate would be predictably steady. I suppose if people wanted decentralized fiat, that'd be the way to do it. Not that I think OP is serious, since the whole point of Bitcoin is to be deflationary.
|
|
|
|
2_Thumbs_Up
|
|
April 20, 2013, 03:32:52 PM |
|
what problem does that solve?
I think a Keynesian would say... Lack of credit expansion? By creating a decentralized analogue to a central bank? I guess I could see it working (though less efficiently than Bitcoin) due to the fact that people will use a fiat currency. Theoretically, as long as people would accept it in exchange for goods and services, then it would work by definition. The target inflation rate would be predictably steady. I suppose if people wanted decentralized fiat, that'd be the way to do it. Not that I think OP is serious, since the whole point of Bitcoin is to be deflationary. This proposed currency would be pretty close to deflationary as well. A fixed sum of new coins means that inflation will decrease every year percentage wise, until it is practically negligible.
|
|
|
|
FTWbitcoinFTW
|
|
April 20, 2013, 03:34:54 PM |
|
the amount of users will grow exponentially over next few years. It will not be possible to realize this when 'all' coins already are held by early adapters Yes it's possible! With 8 decimal and more if needed, a infinite value each ! You can do anything without new bitcoin. But price need to go at 10K 100K, who know ?
|
Lost coins only make everyone else's coins worth slightly more. Think of it as a donation to everyone. it has lots of buttery taste..
|
|
|
wingding (OP)
|
|
April 20, 2013, 03:38:15 PM |
|
what problem does that solve?
I think a Keynesian would say... Lack of credit expansion? By creating a decentralized analogue to a central bank? I guess I could see it working (though less efficiently than Bitcoin) due to the fact that people will use a fiat currency. Theoretically, as long as people would accept it in exchange for goods and services, then it would work by definition. The target inflation rate would be predictably steady. I suppose if people wanted decentralized fiat, that'd be the way to do it. Not that I think OP is serious, since the whole point of Bitcoin is to be deflationary. This proposed currency would be pretty close to deflationary as well. A fixed sum of new coins means that inflation will decrease every year percentage wise, until it is practically negligible. Exactly. And before it becomes negligible it will by far be outmatched by increased demand and market cap.
|
|
|
|
Birdy
|
|
April 20, 2013, 03:42:42 PM |
|
So this will produce alle the coins that are meant to be produced in several years in one and then it suddenly stops?
|
|
|
|
acoindr
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1050
Merit: 1002
|
|
April 20, 2013, 03:44:19 PM |
|
I will create a forked chain of bitcoin to accomdate for broad adaptation. The only major change from the old chain is: Reward of 200 BTC per block for each new block - (never changed)- The chain will produce 10.5 million coins/year (which is far from enough to cause inflation)
- The clients (incl source) running the new fork will be made available well ahead of the fork
- All bitcoins created before the fork will by nature be contained in the new chain
Bitcoin already accommodates broad adoption because they are divisible to 8 decimal places. What you propose is something that has already been discussed. Your fork won't work because the forked coins won't ever have comparable value to bitcoins. The people that hold bitcoins and others interested in their value, like merchants/miners, won't support forked coins that look to disrupt bitcoin in economically messy ways. If they did then what's to stop other forks after your fork? Bitcoins have value because people accept them. Your forked coins wouldn't be accepted on the orignial bitcoin chain, yet holders of original bitcoins could still spend their coins on your fork, so you haven't taken away wealth from people with many coins at all. Also, all possible bitcoins are not already held by people, only about half of total bitcoins exist so far. Last, for your coins to even have a chance at comparable value to bitcoins there should be less of them not more.
|
|
|
|
bg002h
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1464
Merit: 1047
I outlived my lifetime membership:)
|
|
April 20, 2013, 03:53:37 PM |
|
That is an inflation rate of 50% per year at 1 year.
|
|
|
|
TalkingAntColony
Member
Offline
Activity: 62
Merit: 10
|
|
April 20, 2013, 03:54:39 PM |
|
What ever "problem" you are trying to solve here, you are doing nothing other than delaying the problem with your new chain.
|
|
|
|
deepceleron
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1512
Merit: 1036
|
|
April 20, 2013, 04:04:31 PM Last edit: April 20, 2013, 04:16:38 PM by deepceleron |
|
I will create a forked chain of bitcoin to accomdate for broad adaptation.
... "unless you pay me one hundred billion dollars, mua ha ha ha!" So everybody will already have their same 10M bitcoins in your bitcoin fork too, but they'll be inflated out of existence? SELL!! Target value now, 0, future value 0.[/list]
|
|
|
|
drawingthesun
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1176
Merit: 1015
|
|
April 20, 2013, 04:09:07 PM |
|
10 million coins a year sounds like a lot, but if we forward into the future then 10 million coins will becomes smaller and smaller compared to the overall amount of coins, and this supply will curve out like Bitcoins does at the moment.
A better idea would be for the network to mint new coins a function of moved coins (so we don't take into account lost coins)
So if 10 million coins move in a year, the network will mint a amount as a function of that movement in ratio to a percent.
So determine the best % for new coins. Is 3% a year a good inflation rate? 1% instead?
then the network mints 1% of the moved coins over the past 12 months. That would be more stable than 10 million a year, because that 10 million will be less and less each year, eventually it would be 0.0001% of the coin release and less!!!
|
|
|
|
mubit
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 43
Merit: 0
|
|
April 20, 2013, 04:12:16 PM |
|
i made a boat
|
|
|
|
crazy_rabbit
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1204
Merit: 1002
RUM AND CARROTS: A PIRATE LIFE FOR ME
|
|
April 20, 2013, 04:17:23 PM |
|
can we please call it bitcoin also?
|
more or less retired.
|
|
|
oakpacific
|
|
April 20, 2013, 04:17:55 PM |
|
I can tell you how this is going to end: a small portion of the hashpower of the Bitcoin network will join your chain, then 51% you, then you are game over.
|
|
|
|
wingding (OP)
|
|
April 20, 2013, 04:22:01 PM |
|
I can tell you how this is going to end: a small portion of the hashpower of the Bitcoin network will join your chain, then 51% you, then you are game over.
I would have nothing to gain from that, besides it would not neccesarily be possible. My intention starting the new chain is to allow bitcoin a future.
|
|
|
|
doobadoo
|
|
April 20, 2013, 04:28:29 PM |
|
may I suggest your has algo use a combination of PBKDF 2 followed by bcrypt. Should make it harder to gpu mine (bring back the cpu mining!)
Also consider dropping to a 5 min block interval, and requiring more than one nonce. Requiring several nonces, i *think* will cause there to be move 'movements of nature' that will get us to a tighter distribution of the block generation time window. Instead of one block in 6seconds the next in 24 minutes.
Consider, reducing bitcoin to just 4 decimal places. With permanent inflation you will never need so many, and decimal places allow for strange 0.0000000001 txns.
Also consider implementing a block pruning method. You can mess with the headers if it a new change. So try to incorporate other important changes to make it better.
Also 200 btc/block forever is kinda weak too, shouldn't it start at 100/block for the this year. move to 125/block next year, 150/block year 3, 200/block year 4, THEN stay there. Let inflation accelerate to accommodate more noobs.
Just some thoughts
|
"It is, quite honestly, the biggest challenge to central banking since Andrew Jackson." -evoorhees
|
|
|
|