ANN: 100mBTC (0.1 BTC) physical coins + 5 free coins naming competition

[P4man]

Gonna list two other names I like, just so its on record:

Cytoc
Crytoc

(dropped some letters from cryptographic currency)

And one more:

Bling

[1715138754]

1715138754

[1715138754]

1715138754

[1715138754]

1715138754

[1715138754]

1715138754

[1715138754]

1715138754

[Richy_T]

Perhaps a way to work it would be to sell the coins but have the buyer load the bitcoins.

Not sure how that would work though. Maybe you would have to keep hold of the coins until the buyer loaded them. But then if the buyer refused to load them, there would be some dispute. Then the buyer might initiate a reversal with Paypal. That would leave you with the coins but if that happens a few times, Paypal might decide to cut you off.

Edit: Plus this means the buyer needs bitcoins in the first place, negating a lot of the advantage of what you're trying to do. Nevermind.

[casascius]

I am totally cool with this, I encourage competition, and hope this works out well.  I will also be happy to order some.  I honestly wished this happened a long time ago.  While flattered to be the only person producing physical bitcoins, it's not the way I think things "should" be.  Someone who can do a better job of this, should do a better job of it.

Keep in mind that my ulterior motive in producing them in the first place was to promote Bitcoin.  Their creation was motivated by my awareness that people need something physical to be able to talk about Bitcoin to those needing a shiny thing to hold, and that my creating them was going to have a direct impact on the number of Bitcoin conversations happening around the world.  That need hasn't changed, and making a pretty 100mBTC coin given today's rates is a clear example of being attentive to the needs of the market and the potential user base of the coins.

Likewise, welcoming competition is consistent with my original stated goals.  The fact that I have earned a well seeded reputation that results in people being willing to pay the amounts they pay for my original coins is plenty rewarding for me.  I do not need to be the only one making these.

I have one bias I'd like everybody to be aware of, and this concerns both new creators of coins, as well as those who buy the coins.  I am biased in favor of people creating coins who have a good track record of being in business IRL and who maintain a net worth approaching or exceeding the value of the promises they might issue.  A promise not to steal your bitcoins is a promise that can be broken.

What you don't want is a situation where someone is tempted by the opportunity to run and disappear with other people's money.  Depending on which prevailing story you believe, people grossly underestimated this risk with Bitcoinica when deciding to send large amounts of money overseas to a 17-year-old for safekeeping.  The community needs to have learned its lesson by now.  A reasonable policy is to demand 2-factor on all physical coins above a value you could afford to lose if the person who made the item defaults on the trust you have placed in him.

The only challenge I have to those producing physical bitcoins like mine, is that I demand that they prove themselves capable of producing coins securely, properly, avoiding risks of hacking and key compromise, as well as proving themselves worthy of the community's trust.  Meanwhile, I insist that the community not lose sight of the importance of this.  I will really, really, really be bummed the day some future producer of physical bitcoins tarnishes the whole concept by ripping off his customers (or even the day people find unredeemable coins due to production errors), and so I favor accountability and I favor producers having a major sort of skin in the game.

To everyone buying physical bitcoins, please remember that you should always be able to name ONE individual who is responsible for the coins you buy, whose ass is willing to be kicked, and you should be able to assure yourself you'll be able to find him/her if you need to, and that person needs to be able to afford reasonable mistakes, as well as to be sued.  You do not want to hear "sorry I screwed up, but I'm broke, so your loss", nor do you want to hear your attorney say "I'm very sorry for your loss, but you can't get blood out of a stone".

That said... I hope this turns out well!  I would offer naming suggestions, but I think any suggestion I offered would be prejudiced just by me having offered it.  I might offer thumbs ups, thumbs downs, or my comments on other names I see though.  Casascius is a word I simply made up.  I have filed for trademark status on it (my attorney accepts bitcoin!)

[P4man]

I am totally cool with this, I encourage competition, and hope this works out well.  I will also be happy to order some.  I honestly wished this happened a long time ago.  While flattered to be the only person producing physical bitcoins, it's not the way I think things "should" be.  Someone who can do a better job of this, should do a better job of it.

Keep in mind that my ulterior motive in producing them in the first place was to promote Bitcoin.  Their creation was motivated by my awareness that people need something physical to be able to talk about Bitcoin to those needing a shiny thing to hold, and that my creating them was going to have a direct impact on the number of Bitcoin conversations happening around the world.  That need hasn't changed, and making a pretty 100mBTC coin given today's rates is a clear example of being attentive to the needs of the market and the potential user base of the coins.

Likewise, welcoming competition is consistent with my original stated goals.  The fact that I have earned a well seeded reputation that results in people being willing to pay the amounts they pay for my original coins is plenty rewarding for me.  I do not need to be the only one making these.

I was going to say, one day they ought to erect a statue for you, but instead as a tribute, maybe I should mint coins with your face on them instead .

I have one bias I'd like everybody to be aware of, and this concerns both new creators of coins, as well as those who buy the coins.  I am biased in favor of people creating coins who have a good track record of being in business IRL and who maintain a net worth approaching or exceeding the value of the promises they might issue.  A promise not to steal your bitcoins is a promise that can be broken.

What you don't want is a situation where someone is tempted by the opportunity to run and disappear with other people's money.  Depending on which prevailing story you believe, people grossly underestimated this risk with Bitcoinica when deciding to send large amounts of money overseas to a 17-year-old for safekeeping.  The community needs to have learned its lesson by now.  A reasonable policy is to demand 2-factor on all physical coins above a value you could afford to lose if the person who made the item defaults on the trust you have placed in him.

Its another reason Im going for small denominations. Depending on final cost and pricing, if I were to steal all the unredeemed coins at some point in the future, I could probably not even double my revenue and its not exactly going to be enough to pay for a one way ticket to an exotic island. What I could potentially gain is a pretty low incentive, particularly compared to the 100BTC bars and the like that you are selling.
If you were to steal the bitcoins you have sold you could probably buy the island by now .

The only challenge I have to those producing physical bitcoins like mine, is that I demand that they prove themselves capable of producing coins securely, properly, avoiding risks of hacking and key compromise, as well as proving themselves worthy of the community's trust.  Meanwhile, I insist that the community not lose sight of the importance of this.  I will really, really, really be bummed the day some future producer of physical bitcoins tarnishes the whole concept by ripping off his customers (or even the day people find unredeemable coins due to production errors), and so I favor accountability and I favor producers having a major sort of skin in the game.

To everyone buying physical bitcoins, please remember that you should always be able to name ONE individual who is responsible for the coins you buy, whose ass is willing to be kicked, and you should be able to assure yourself you'll be able to find him/her if you need to, and that person needs to be able to afford reasonable mistakes, as well as to be sued.  You do not want to hear "sorry I screwed up, but I'm broke, so your loss", nor do you want to hear your attorney say "I'm very sorry for your loss, but you can't get blood out of a stone"

.

I mostly agree.
Im not entirely sure yet if or how I will handle this as a legal business, but plenty of people here already know who I am and were to find me.  
As for my trustworthiness; that will be for customers to judge and weigh against the incentive I would have for ripping them off. I know you are speaking in general terms, but for the record, my first batch will be 1000 coins of 0.1 BTC. Assuming I actually manage to sell them all, subtract any redeemed coins and whats left is a very complicated, expensive and risky way to try to con people out of ~50 BTC. I can think of easier ways.

That said... I hope this turns out well!  I would offer naming suggestions, but I think any suggestion I offered would be prejudiced just by me having offered it.  I might offer thumbs ups, thumbs downs, or my comments on other names I see though.  Casascius is a word I simply made up.  I have filed for trademark status on it (my attorney accepts bitcoin!)

Feel free to offer. I can always say no .

[naypalm]

Gonna list two other names I like, just so its on record:

Cytoc
Crytoc

(dropped some letters from cryptographic currency)

And one more:

Bling

Crytec or Cryteq sounds cool!

[ratacat]

I like Cryteq!  Way better then Cryhard =)  lol.  P4man you should make a pre-order list.  I'd love to order a few handfuls from you...just what I need to pass around to friends and family!  It's perfect

Crickets
Cryptics

[Nikolaj06]

Cryptoken! Cryptokens in plural
Great initiative, I would definitely be interested as casascius have become quite expensive..
Also, where are you situated? US or EU?

[milone]

Name suggestions:

decimus
decima
decimum

They all are ways to say "tenth" in Latin, since these are a tenth of a bitcoin. I think decimus sounds best.

[P4man]

Also, where are you situated? US or EU?

Belgium, EU.

[P4man]

P4man you should make a pre-order list.

I probably will, but certainly not before I ordered everything myself and have a firm shipping date. Otherwise Id have to call it "butterfly coin" .

[tmbp]

Having people on the side is tasteless, you need to embed more of the very human nature that has led for us to create this very technology, probably write "Caput Mundi", "fiat lux" or "Sic semper tyrannis" on it.

[P4man]

Having people on the side is tasteless,

Tasteless? What makes you say that? I think its subtle (keep in mind actual dimensions, you will barely be able to make them out) and looks rather good, while the symbolism of users exchanging coins directly and globally seems perfectly appropriate. Isnt that the essence of bitcoin?

As for the slogans. I can certainly appreciate "vires in numeris" (who came up with that actually?) but Im gonna stay well clear of any political slogans. Its a coin not a socio political pamphlet.

[Richy_T]

Someone needs to get some Satoshi coins made. It would be a bit of a laugh and handy when they become worth $10/piece.

[Vod]

My comment:  Why is the 1 larger than the two zeros in "100"?  Looked a bit odd to me.

[Mabsark]

I propose the name BitBobs, "bob" being the slang name for an English shilling which was equal to 12 pence.

[Richy_T]

I propose the name BitBobs, "bob" being the slang name for an English shilling which was equal to 12 pence.

That would be more appropriate for an 0.05 bitcoin piece though.

[stereotype]

I propose the name BitBobs, "bob" being the slang name for an English shilling which was equal to 12 pence.

Nicely done. I like that.

Those were the days, eh?...."yer got a couple ov bob on yer, cock?" !

[tehace]

How about "mills" or "bitmills" It rhymes with "bill" like fiat bills but is also bills and mili(bitcoins) combined in one word.

[P4man]

Current short list:

Cryteq
Hardcoin
Bitbob (isnt that nickname of someone here?)

Cryteq sounds the best to me, but Im slightly worried Crytek may not like it. Bitbob is kinda funny, as my first name happens to be Bob .

Keep 'm coming.

[MoonShad0w384]

I'm against cryteq or variations on it. It sounds kinda dumb (faux-cool; you're naming a coin, not a gaming PC) and doesn't really tell you anything about the product. If it has to be one of those three, please use hardcoin or bitbob.