[ANN] ZenithCoin (ZTC) Market Making Sustainable Crypto Currency

[alex_fun]

Freicoin takes 80% so this is like freicoin with less %? Also who would want to sell btc worth 100 + usd to buy this coin?

[alex_fun]

Also are u saying this coin needs 50% of all mined coins to get somewhere?

[solracx]

What is the starting difficulty of the coin?

By the way nice of you to make a real announcement first

This will depend on the proof of work selected on a current poll.

But rest assured, it definitely will not be zero like so many other coins before it.

[solracx]

Freicoin takes 80% so this is like freicoin with less %? Also who would want to sell btc worth 100 + usd to buy this coin?

Yes, however no demurage,  flexible proof-of-work scrypt based and 2 times BTC mint rate.

[solracx]

Also are u saying this coin needs 50% of all mined coins to get somewhere?

Works similar to Freicoin in this aspect, however distribution is more uniform.

So, there are 2016 distribution addresses, each recorded and monitored by the block chain.

Each of the 2016 distribution addresses has their own market making function.

So one may may be a faucet that just loses money all the time but promotes the coin.
Another one may be a satoshi dice like that profits on a percentage of bets.
We have another one that provides bond like functionality.
So we have lots of these built up over time to stimulate the economy.

Over time, each of these addresses starts being incorporated in the miner in P2P fashion.

[User_513]

Wow, I get to pay 100% of my power & internet bills, do 100% of all the administration of the hardware I paid 100% for, and I get to have 50% of the coins I mine? I think this coin should be renamed to GOVcoin. Who else would tell you that being allowed to keep half of what you produce is 'generous'?

Please read the FAQ.

Anyway, the explanation is here is that we are trying to have a balanced incentive for both miners and developers.  Miners provide the operations, developers provide the growth opportunities.

The weakness of so many coins is that there is so very little incentive for anyone to improve a coin after it has been released.   Just look for example at a relatively successful coin (Litecoin),  how well is it supported by developers?  

The balance here is that miners will hoard the coin because they trust that the developers will over time add value to the coin.  Similarly, if developers believe that they can be successful in building value, then they will also hoard the coin.  

Yes, it is different from what folks may be used to, but most coins other than BTC and LTC will trend toward zero without sustained developer effort that differentiates the coin from other coins.  Flipping parameters like confirmation rate, #of coins per block are irrelevant to survival of a coin.

I appreciate the response and I did read the FAQ. I'm just not down with giving you 50% of my meager hashing power for free. Thanks though.

[psybits]

Also are u saying this coin needs 50% of all mined coins to get somewhere?

Works similar to Freicoin in this aspect, however distribution is more uniform.

So, there are 2016 distribution addresses, each recorded and monitored by the block chain.

Each of the 2016 distribution addresses has their own market making function.

So one may may be a faucet that just loses money all the time but promotes the coin.
Another one may be a satoshi dice like that profits on a percentage of bets.
We have another one that provides bond like functionality.
So we have lots of these built up over time to stimulate the economy.

Over time, each of these addresses starts being incorporated in the miner in P2P fashion.

I think this is actually pretty clever. I think if you gave the miners 90% outright and only 10% went to the further development of the coin you would get a better response. 50% of every single block is too much imo but I like the concept.

[solracx]

Wow, I get to pay 100% of my power & internet bills, do 100% of all the administration of the hardware I paid 100% for, and I get to have 50% of the coins I mine? I think this coin should be renamed to GOVcoin. Who else would tell you that being allowed to keep half of what you produce is 'generous'?

Please read the FAQ.

Anyway, the explanation is here is that we are trying to have a balanced incentive for both miners and developers.  Miners provide the operations, developers provide the growth opportunities.

The weakness of so many coins is that there is so very little incentive for anyone to improve a coin after it has been released.   Just look for example at a relatively successful coin (Litecoin),  how well is it supported by developers?  

The balance here is that miners will hoard the coin because they trust that the developers will over time add value to the coin.  Similarly, if developers believe that they can be successful in building value, then they will also hoard the coin.  

Yes, it is different from what folks may be used to, but most coins other than BTC and LTC will trend toward zero without sustained developer effort that differentiates the coin from other coins.  Flipping parameters like confirmation rate, #of coins per block are irrelevant to survival of a coin.

I appreciate the response and I did read the FAQ. I'm just not down with giving you 50% of my meager hashing power for free. Thanks though.

Keep in mind that the key to successful mining is to hold coins that appreciate in value over time.   All alt-coins that have releaase recently have done nothing but go down over time.

[solracx]

I think this is actually pretty clever. I think if you gave the miners 90% outright and only 10% went to the further development of the coin you would get a better response. 50% of every single block is too much imo but I like the concept.

If you compare with devcoin and freicoin which have been around for quite a long time (relatively) 50% is actually more generous.   

However, think of it this way,  if you were an early stage investor in a start-up, would you feel comfortable taking 90% of the outstanding shares and leaving just 10% to the people who will run the company?   I doubt you will since you give little incentive for them to perform.

Mining is at present is a way to get shares at a discount relative to the market (just look at the price of most coins).   Certainly, miners would mine a more profitable coin, however remember, most mining profit is made by holding coins that appreciate over time.   

[solracx]

At least this coin actually has a new feature - best ANN all week 

Not only will it have a new feature, it will actually be well supported (unlike many other coins that we shall not name)

[mercSuey]

It seems to me 'market making' will be the primary activity, other than development projects, for the 50% of coins.  Yet, I see no finance team to complement the dev team.  You show no credentials or resume, hide behind an avatar like 99.9% of other users on this forum, and somehow we're supposed to be comfortable with the idea your skills as an arbitrageur and capital/finance manager will provide positive ROI for 50% of mined coins?  How in the world is this different than banks using deposits so poorly that once the market turns against them (eg. mortgage market) even slightly, they will need a bail out?  Congrats, you have invented the open source version of this financial nonsense.  Except there is no central governing entity to bail out zenith coin.  It will just fail, leaving a wasteful carbon footprint and nothing more.  This is laughable.  And all transparency will do is allow us to better see you risk assets and, consequently, DESTROY future development projects.  Your 'market making' activities will have the exact opposite effect of creating incentive for the devs.  I repeat, this is laughable.

[BBQKorv]

Look at that, something with a chance to be valuable.

[solracx]

It seems to me 'market making' will be the primary activity, other than development projects, for the 50% of coins.  Yet, I see no finance team to complement the dev team.  You show no credentials or resume, hide behind an avatar like 99.9% of other users on this forum, and somehow we're supposed to be comfortable with the idea your skills as an arbitrageur and capital/finance manager will provide positive ROI for 50% of mined coins?  How in the world is this different than banks using deposits so poorly that once the market turns against them (eg. mortgage market) even slightly, they will need a bail out?  Congrats, you have invented the open source version of this financial nonsense.  Except there is no central governing entity to bail out zenith coin.  It will just fail, leaving a wasteful carbon footprint and nothing more.  This is laughable.  And all transparency will do is allow us to better see you risk assets and, consequently, DESTROY future development projects.  Your 'market making' activities will have the exact opposite effect of creating incentive for the devs.  I repeat, this is laughable.

Market Making at the most simplest form is to to use the fund to acquire reserve deflationary currencies to back the coin.  Just like any central bank backs its currency by holding reserves in a basket of other currencies.

Let's speak about arbitrage here for a second.  Current crypto markets are extremely inefficient, so any basic level of automation can easily profit out of this inefficiency.

[solracx]

Look at that, something with a chance to be valuable.

I think if you at this as an experimental test best for all kinds of new bitcoin mechanisms, then the coin itself becomes valuable in that it validates new innovations.   

[Hydroponica]

So, instead of a premine, he just takes %50 of the miner's coins 

[solracx]

difficulty changes every 4096 blocks...hmm i dont see it lasting long after the initial hype

Adjusted to every 9 blocks.

[mobodick]

Launch Date June 1, 2013

Important question:
Who will hold the trust coins?

[mercSuey]

It seems to me 'market making' will be the primary activity, other than development projects, for the 50% of coins.  Yet, I see no finance team to complement the dev team.  You show no credentials or resume, hide behind an avatar like 99.9% of other users on this forum, and somehow we're supposed to be comfortable with the idea your skills as an arbitrageur and capital/finance manager will provide positive ROI for 50% of mined coins?  How in the world is this different than banks using deposits so poorly that once the market turns against them (eg. mortgage market) even slightly, they will need a bail out?  Congrats, you have invented the open source version of this financial nonsense.  Except there is no central governing entity to bail out zenith coin.  It will just fail, leaving a wasteful carbon footprint and nothing more.  This is laughable.  And all transparency will do is allow us to better see you risk assets and, consequently, DESTROY future development projects.  Your 'market making' activities will have the exact opposite effect of creating incentive for the devs.  I repeat, this is laughable.

Let's speak about arbitrage here for a second.  Current crypto markets are extremely inefficient, so any basic level of automation can easily profit out of this inefficiency.

Yes, lets speak about arbitrage.  Being a former fund manager for over ten years, when you simplify the dynamics of market trading, be it arbitrage or whatever, as a 'basic level of automation,' then I become wary of your business model.  It shows your inexperience, and quite frankly, immaturity and lack of discipline.  Show me your proposed scheme.  Is it strictly lateral arbitrage?  That is, will you exchange zenith coins into BTC then transfer coins to mtgox and sell the BTC into USD?  And then what happens if BTC runs?  You've basically crippled your returns.  And what if you need to purchase BTC and you've purchased at the top of said run and BTC falls?

And again, what are your credentials to even propose that there's a 'basic level of automation' which can enable arbitrage opportunities?  Who's the trading team?  Or are the devs, who are supposed to be working on projects, going to have to spend their time doing something outside their level of expertise?  I can go on and on...

It is clear the model for your coin is ill-advised.

[mobodick]

It is clear the model for your coin is ill-advised.

Not if the objective is to hold 50% of all mined coins...

Without an instrument for the investors (miners) to steer the funds to goals its pretty much broken from the getgo.
The fund could be very transparent about buying blow and hookers from the coins and there is nothing the investors could do except walk away and take their losses.

[solracx]

So, instead of a premine, he just takes %50 of the miner's coins 

You can look it another way,  half of all newly minted coins go to the miners, the other half go to coin development.

Or 50% go to operations, 50% go to development.

Miners enable the coin to operate on a daily basis.
Development creates new value for the coin over time.