A proposed fair premine idea

[ictin]

Hi,
I see that the vast majority has a problem with the premine  when is about a new coin. But we have to consider that also the developers need to have an incentive to develop new and maybe innovative coins. If you take away the premine, the developers will find other tricks to make some money. And we all seen that with bitbar starting at low difficulty and everybody getting orphans because the devs and their friends took over the network, with the yacoin where the developer is suspected to mine with the GPU while the rest are mining with the CPU, and all other coins where everybody are jumping when the difficulty is really low and the payoff is insane only to be left frustrated that they only managed t get maybe 100 coins while some others have by the thousands in a few hours, and this is generating to sides: one side that will support the coin because they where there in the first couple of hours and the 80%-90% of all the coins and the rest that will simply be to upset because they miss the coin launch.
So i propose a fair premine schema (well, i think is fair):
1. Have a fair starting difficulty, like 1 or 5 or anything fair
2. The genesis block will contain lets say 5000 coins if the reward per block is 50 and it will mined by the developer
3. After that the reward for the first 1000 will be 0
4. After that the reward will slowly increase to 100 and when is reaching 100 will stay there for a while (to have some kind an incentive for the people to mine)
5. After that the reward will decrease until is reaching 50 and that will be the stable reward

[mullick]

Ingeneious. The fairest way I have seen of starting a coin. May be hard to get people started since there is no reward for early adopters. But will create better stability at the exchanges because there will not be miners dumping 1000's of coins as soon as it hits the market or shortly after.

Edit: Ya I don't agree with the pre mine though. Unless its a trusted author and it all goes towards bounty's

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

No premine is fair.

Bitcoin was not created by someone who wanted to make a quick buck. Bitcoin was created by someone who wanted an alternate system for digital money and transactions.

Anyone who creates an alt coin for the purpose of getting a profit has dubious motivations.

[melvster]

The way I see it, *any* kind of premine will give you a bad PR hurdle.

At present it seems an all or nothing thing.  Either dont premine, or premine everything.  Ripple premined all and had a bigger market cap than btc now.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

The way I see it, *any* kind of premine will give you a bad PR hurdle.

At present it seems an all or nothing thing.  Either dont premine, or premine everything.  Ripple premined all and had a bigger market cap than btc now.

Ripple may currently have a bigger market cap, however it should be noted that most of the Ripples are not in circulation.

Plus, I'm ramping up my marketing efforts. If it takes tens of thousands of dollars to kill ripple, I will spend it. (Check who is bidding for all the available ad slots here).

[melvster]

Im thinking about a premine strategy where 10% of all new coins (and tx fees) go to charity.  

The list of acceptable charities is agreed by consensus (but they MUST accept bitcoin) and the miners are able to influence where the funds go.

Additionally these coins should be tracked, so that you find out exactly what happened to them and who got the benefit.  Perhaps there will be some blogging/microblogging for success stories.

This is equivalent of the historical "tithe" system.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Im thinking about a premine strategy where 10% of all new coins (and tx fees) go to charity.  

The list of acceptable charities is agreed by consensus (but they MUST accept bitcoin) and the miners are able to influence where the funds go.

Additionally these coins should be tracked, so that you find out exactly what happened to them and who got the benefit.  Perhaps there will be some blogging/microblogging for success stories.

This is equivalent of the historical "tithe" system.

There was Devcoin with pretty much this idea.

[ictin]

No premine is fair.

Bitcoin was not created by someone who wanted to make a quick buck. Bitcoin was created by someone who wanted an alternate system for digital money and transactions.

Anyone who creates an alt coin for the purpose of getting a profit has dubious motivations.

Yes, maybe the bitcoin was not created with the purpose of making a quick buck, but let's be fair, a lot of people got rich with the bitcoin. A lot of people that are shouting that all premine is bad got rich by just pointing some hardware to the network on the early stage and sit on their asses. Yes, everybody want to make a quick buck, to think that someone will do something only for the good of the humanity is just plain silly. If this is the case, then why everybody is buying ASICS? To see a better world? And is only fair that the developer will benefit in some way from his work.

When bitcoin was launched, almost nobody knew about it, and the core team was mining a fair share, and this is fair. Now, when a new coin is launched everybody with launch at it massive computing power, and so the dev, to make something out of it it will use some tricks to have a fair share. Again, if you think that someone will spend countless hours of work just so some guy with a powerful rig to make a quick buck you need to think again. What if the guy that developed the coin has just a normal GPU and is generating maybe 400 kh\s on scrypt, you think that he will work just for someone else to get rich? No, he will use tricks to have his fair share, and everybody will scream on the forum about orphans and other problems

[melvster]

Im thinking about a premine strategy where 10% of all new coins (and tx fees) go to charity.  

The list of acceptable charities is agreed by consensus (but they MUST accept bitcoin) and the miners are able to influence where the funds go.

Additionally these coins should be tracked, so that you find out exactly what happened to them and who got the benefit.  Perhaps there will be some blogging/microblogging for success stories.

This is equivalent of the historical "tithe" system.

There was Devcoin with pretty much this idea.

Thanks for the pointer.

The problem with all premining is that it can be gamed.  Even if it is hard or impossible to game, you will give a potentially bad impression.

I'm very interested to look at mining strategies.

Firstly, devcoin only gave 10% to miners.  That's not enough of an incentive.  I propose to give 90% to miners.

Secondly, I strongly feel that all this electricity should be at least in part used for some kind of common good, we should optimize the good, not the devs pockets

Thirdly, the big problem in the world today is distribution of money.  This is *always* gamed ... you need a water tight system (think Satoshi strength) to reduce or eliminate gaming.  Even charities themselves spend too much on admin costs.  We need accountability, not random awards and bounties.  We need league tables with transparency.  Tracking in realtime.  Amiller used the term 'competative giving'  -- this is what I think would be an effective mining strategy ..

Just my 2 satoshis

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

No premine is fair.

Bitcoin was not created by someone who wanted to make a quick buck. Bitcoin was created by someone who wanted an alternate system for digital money and transactions.

Anyone who creates an alt coin for the purpose of getting a profit has dubious motivations.

Yes, maybe the bitcoin was not created with the purpose of making a quick buck, but let's be fair, a lot of people got rich with the bitcoin. A lot of people that are shouting that all premine is bad got rich by just pointing some hardware to the network on the early stage and sit on their asses. Yes, everybody want to make a quick buck, to think that someone will do something only for the good of the humanity is just plain silly. If this is the case, then why everybody is buying ASICS? To see a better world? And is only fair that the developer will benefit in some way from his work.

When bitcoin was launched, almost nobody knew about it, and the core team was mining a fair share, and this is fair. Now, when a new coin is launched everybody with launch at it massive computing power, and so the dev, to make something out of it it will use some tricks to have a fair share. Again, if you think that someone will spend countless hours of work just so some guy with a powerful rig to make a quick buck you need to think again. What if the guy that developed the coin has just a normal GPU and is generating maybe 400 kh\s on scrypt, you think that he will work just for someone else to get rich? No, he will use tricks to have his fair share, and everybody will scream on the forum about orphans and other problems

Did you even read what I fucking wrote?

The problem with fiat currency these days are because they're controlled by people who want to make money.

A good alt coin exactly needs someone who donates their time to an open source project. They may be rewarded, but they need to play by the same rules as others.

Why do people contribute to OpenOffice?

Why do people submit patches to Linux?

Because they want to make a quick buck? No!

But that doesn't mean you can't make money off something like bitcoin. Think of it as offering support contracts for Linux.

[bitdwarf]

There's millions and millions of people out there that are mentally capable and ethically entitled of taking part in the crypto movement. Will it ever be fair that just us the bunch of nerds around here is aware of a crypto launch?

If you want a fair launch first thing first, get it on the front page of the New York Times, so to speak.

[anderl]

Ingeneious. The fairest way I have seen of starting a coin. May be hard to get people started since there is no reward for early adopters. But will create better stability at the exchanges because there will not be miners dumping 1000's of coins as soon as it hits the market or shortly after.

Edit: Ya I don't agree with the pre mine though. Unless its a trusted author and it all goes towards bounty's

true.  the coin developers recently have been creating coins with no real purpose.  they only go as far as getting onto an exchange so they can immediately cash out.  there is no long term plan in the coin.

what should happen is a venture capital funding into a coin.  developers and VC adopters that are funding the coin should be provided some stake for their efforts but those coins need to be "locked in" in some way do they are not allowed to be spend for a period of time "1 year"

maybe someone could build a website that monitors the first 5000 blocks of any new coins for transactions and if any are spend the coin is labelled insta-mined and dubbed worthless by the community.  only those coins that have sound long term investors would qualify as good investments.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Ingeneious. The fairest way I have seen of starting a coin. May be hard to get people started since there is no reward for early adopters. But will create better stability at the exchanges because there will not be miners dumping 1000's of coins as soon as it hits the market or shortly after.

Edit: Ya I don't agree with the pre mine though. Unless its a trusted author and it all goes towards bounty's

true.  the coin developers recently have been creating coins with no real purpose.  they only go as far as getting onto an exchange so they can immediately cash out.  there is no long term plan in the coin.

what should happen is a venture capital funding into a coin.  developers and VC adopters that are funding the coin should be provided some stake for their efforts but those coins need to be "locked in" in some way do they are not allowed to be spend for a period of time "1 year"

maybe someone could build a website that monitors the first 5000 blocks of any new coins for transactions and if any are spend the coin is labelled insta-mined and dubbed worthless by the community.  only those coins that have sound long term investors would qualify as good investments.

Why do that instead of with code? For example, Bitcoin has had zero premine. The 50 BTC generated could not be spent at all, on purpose.

[ictin]

No premine is fair.

Bitcoin was not created by someone who wanted to make a quick buck. Bitcoin was created by someone who wanted an alternate system for digital money and transactions.

Anyone who creates an alt coin for the purpose of getting a profit has dubious motivations.

Yes, maybe the bitcoin was not created with the purpose of making a quick buck, but let's be fair, a lot of people got rich with the bitcoin. A lot of people that are shouting that all premine is bad got rich by just pointing some hardware to the network on the early stage and sit on their asses. Yes, everybody want to make a quick buck, to think that someone will do something only for the good of the humanity is just plain silly. If this is the case, then why everybody is buying ASICS? To see a better world? And is only fair that the developer will benefit in some way from his work.

When bitcoin was launched, almost nobody knew about it, and the core team was mining a fair share, and this is fair. Now, when a new coin is launched everybody with launch at it massive computing power, and so the dev, to make something out of it it will use some tricks to have a fair share. Again, if you think that someone will spend countless hours of work just so some guy with a powerful rig to make a quick buck you need to think again. What if the guy that developed the coin has just a normal GPU and is generating maybe 400 kh\s on scrypt, you think that he will work just for someone else to get rich? No, he will use tricks to have his fair share, and everybody will scream on the forum about orphans and other problems

Did you even read what I fucking wrote?

The problem with fiat currency these days are because they're controlled by people who want to make money.

A good alt coin exactly needs someone who donates their time to an open source project. They may be rewarded, but they need to play by the same rules as others.

Why do people contribute to OpenOffice?

Why do people submit patches to Linux?

Because they want to make a quick buck? No!

But that doesn't mean you can't make money off something like bitcoin. Think of it as offering support contracts for Linux.

This cryptocoin movement is no ordinary opensource movement. Yes, they donate their time to contribute to OpenOffice, but if the OpenOffice will sold and the guys that are selling the OpenOffice will make millions and the developers that have donated their time will have to rely on the generosity of that guys, and possibly getting nothing, i don't think that it wil donate their time anymore.
Until now every coin had some sort of premine. Bitcoin had his premine, because at the start was only a handful of people knowing about it. The guys that are mining are making a quick buck, but the same guys want the developers to "donate" their time so they can make the money. Is this fair? Is this fair to donate your time and others to get rich using your work? Because if this is the fairness of the cryptocois, that some guys to "donate" their time and work hard while others will sit on their asses and make a quick profit, it will fail just like the communism.
And just for fun, who is here just to make a better world and they don't want any profit, please rise your hands and donate all your cryptocoins (bitcoin, litecoin etc.) to charity. Then I will believe it. But this is not the case, because even you are here to make a profit, but you are upset if some else is doing. Is normal, because this is the human nature.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

I, like every human, do many things in life not motivated by profit. Bitcoin was a creation that wasn't motivated by profit, and that's part of the reason for it's success.

There was no premine. Sure, only a small group of people heard about it, but it was announced to the public in a mailing list. It wasn't a premine. Please also use paragraphs next time.

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

And just for fun, who is here just to make a better world and they don't want any profit, please rise your hands and donate all your cryptocoins (bitcoin, litecoin etc.) to charity.

The fuck?

Let me ask you this.. is the only thing you value in life making a profit?

Not everything is motivated by profit.

The early programmers and hackers were not motivated by profit, but rather it was something they were passionate and excited about.

What happens when people start caring about profit and jumping in without any passion? Dot com bubble, hmm. Profit isn't bad or evil, it's required for a society and economy to function. It is NOT required for someone to code something that may change the world.

[erk]

Why not simply disable the seed server until 24hr after people have had a chance to download the client software ans set up?

[🏰 TradeFortress 🏰]

Why not simply disable the seed server until 24hr after people have had a chance to download the client software ans set up?

because people could still mine during that time?

The best way to do this would be a high starting difficulty - say 4000, and announce the coin launch at least a couple of days in advance.

[erk]

Why not simply disable the seed server until 24hr after people have had a chance to download the client software ans set up?

because people could still mine during that time?

The best way to do this would be a high starting difficulty - say 4000, and announce the coin launch at least a couple of days in advance.

Um you put it into the client code that the first block has to come from the seed nodes and is checksum so it can't be faked. And 51% of the miners wont have the invalid block from people that try to solo mine,  so it will be rejected, thee will have the real first block from the seed nodes.

[anderl]

Ingeneious. The fairest way I have seen of starting a coin. May be hard to get people started since there is no reward for early adopters. But will create better stability at the exchanges because there will not be miners dumping 1000's of coins as soon as it hits the market or shortly after.

Edit: Ya I don't agree with the pre mine though. Unless its a trusted author and it all goes towards bounty's

true.  the coin developers recently have been creating coins with no real purpose.  they only go as far as getting onto an exchange so they can immediately cash out.  there is no long term plan in the coin.

what should happen is a venture capital funding into a coin.  developers and VC adopters that are funding the coin should be provided some stake for their efforts but those coins need to be "locked in" in some way do they are not allowed to be spend for a period of time "1 year"

maybe someone could build a website that monitors the first 5000 blocks of any new coins for transactions and if any are spend the coin is labelled insta-mined and dubbed worthless by the community.  only those coins that have sound long term investors would qualify as good investments.

Why do that instead of with code? For example, Bitcoin has had zero premine. The 50 BTC generated could not be spent at all, on purpose.

I'm talking about a temporary locking.  A specific time before the first set of coins can be sold.  Like stock share structures.  Private investors are locked in for a period of time just after the IPO.