digitalindustry
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 01, 2013, 03:19:39 PM |
|
If you can lock them into things like multisig escrows and merge them into Open Transactions, you will have viable derivatives.
You mean using an escrow service to distribute the coins? wow, thanks. I'll look around for a trustworthy guy, any suggestions? the part i don't get is the merging into Open transactions. he's basically talking about Nashx - and Nash equilibrium , but he probably/maybe doesn't realize it . merge into open transaction i'd say just means - "automate the process and make it seamless" I brought it up in Netcoin - but the Nashx guy done it first - , but i don't think it needs to be done ? if Ant goes to Cryptsy Ant is being exchanged so the value of the derivative is being exchanged . he is talking about a P2P exchange .
|
- Twitter @Kolin_Quark
|
|
|
digitalindustry
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 01, 2013, 03:23:01 PM |
|
I don't really understand. How do you know exactly was is the price for altcoin1 ... altcoin2 ... altcoinxx ?
we consider 1) Volume mined 2) level of premining 3) distribution 4) how much interest was shown 5) if the chain was forked or any other deal breakers who decides ? i didn't even think of that , i think i just asked the deal breaking question - there will be a one off poll 24 hours before launch where people will vote the coins in. That way the community part is satisfied in a free manner. you will have to run continuous votes as new coins will be wanting to be added all the time , not that this is a bad thing , I'm just saying , also make sure there is large market participation otherwise the obvious will happen, but however that will be equaled out by the exchange of Ants in the future, ha ha interesting flow of electrons here.
|
- Twitter @Kolin_Quark
|
|
|
cbeast
Donator
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1736
Merit: 1010
Let's talk governance, lipstick, and pigs.
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 01, 2013, 03:23:38 PM |
|
If you can lock them into things like multisig escrows and merge them into Open Transactions, you will have viable derivatives.
You mean using an escrow service to distribute the coins? wow, thanks. I'll look around for a trustworthy guy, any suggestions? the part i don't get is the merging into Open transactions. he's basically talking about Nashx - and Nash equilibrium , but he probably/maybe doesn't realize it . merge into open transaction i'd say just means - "automate the process and make it seamless" I brought it up in Netcoin - but the Nashx guy done it first - , but i don't think it needs to be done ? if Ant goes to Cryptsy Ant is being exchanged so the value of the derivative is being exchanged . he is talking about a P2P exchange . I wasn't aware of Nashx or Netcoin, but yes a Nash equilibrium. I would use interconnected nested multisignature transactions based on coin age and/or WoT.
|
Any significantly advanced cryptocurrency is indistinguishable from Ponzi Tulips.
|
|
|
digitalindustry
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 01, 2013, 03:30:57 PM Last edit: July 01, 2013, 03:40:58 PM by digitalindustry |
|
Or - ok wait for this:
Grab ALL the spam literally as much as you can find
put them in a vote and then request / ask Devs to remove them or send a request for them to be removed.
why?
because you are going to value them all at the same very low price -
if the Dev believes his value to be higher and its going to exchange he will request it to be removed , however if there is no chance that its going to exchange there is no motive to do this.
thus it gets added to the Ant at a = No chance to exchange price value. whatever that may be and could be voted on.
then if the Devs that removed coins find out they are holding something that has no chance to exchange , then they can submit it to Ant.
exceptions to this should be a "viable currency clause" :
for example Kopimikoin is not a "viable currency" as Hazard wrote himself 900k of them, so the market agrees its "not viable" these are the votes that could be taken.
this way the vote motive equation polarity is shifted from the positive to the negative and it will balance.
then there would be two votes in the process and process follows this path :
1. Submit list of currency- 2. verify list for = "viable currency" Vote if necessary on argument. 3. let list been seen on open market, request Developers/owners to remove if they wish. 4. vote on the final = "No chance to exchange price" which should never exceed an exchanged currency price or possibly the division of all the exchanged currencies on the market, let market decide.
start filling the Ants legs up !
|
- Twitter @Kolin_Quark
|
|
|
barwizi (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 882
Merit: 1000
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 01, 2013, 03:34:10 PM |
|
If you can lock them into things like multisig escrows and merge them into Open Transactions, you will have viable derivatives.
You mean using an escrow service to distribute the coins? wow, thanks. I'll look around for a trustworthy guy, any suggestions? the part i don't get is the merging into Open transactions. he's basically talking about Nashx - and Nash equilibrium , but he probably/maybe doesn't realize it . merge into open transaction i'd say just means - "automate the process and make it seamless" I brought it up in Netcoin - but the Nashx guy done it first - , but i don't think it needs to be done ? if Ant goes to Cryptsy Ant is being exchanged so the value of the derivative is being exchanged . he is talking about a P2P exchange . Ah i get it!!! Yes that would be perfectly suited for this. But which people to trust with that? my servers are down and i do not own escrow software, perhaps i'll speak with the phenix guys and koolio.
|
|
|
|
barwizi (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 882
Merit: 1000
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 01, 2013, 03:40:11 PM |
|
Or - ok wait for this:
Grab ALL the spam literally as much as you can find
put them in a vote and then request / ask Devs to remove them or send a request for them to be removed.
why?
because you are going to value them all at the same very low price -
if the Dev believes his value to be higher and its going to exchange he will request it to be removed , however if there is no chance that its going to exchange there is no motive to do this.
thus it gets added to the Ant at a = No chance to exchange price value. whatever that may be and could be voted on.
then if the Devs that removed coins find out they are holding something that has no chance to exchange , then they can submit it to Ant.
exceptions to this should be a "viable currency clause" :
for example Kopimikoin is not a "viable currency" as Hazard wrote himself 900k of them, so the market agrees its "not viable" these are the votes that could be taken.
this way the vote motive equation polarity is shifted from the positive to the negative and it will balance.
sounds reasonable. but you do know half of them have the same dev right?
|
|
|
|
digitalindustry
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 01, 2013, 03:48:19 PM Last edit: July 01, 2013, 04:06:12 PM by digitalindustry |
|
sounds reasonable. but you do know half of them have the same dev right?
hmm interesting and yes you are right of course - , then that Dev has to decide if they are all useless , lets face it , Cryptsy isn't going to add currencies forever its just not feasible. Cryptsy might add a few more , but at a point i bet C++ code can make them quicker than he can add them . Ant may help the whole crypto community - because in this way it's asking the Dev to value his currency - if he chooses to : A) remove them all from Ant , but then they will likely never get listed , he could make his own exchange but no one will use it so they have 0 price and he is just creating things that have no value in the hope that he can destroy cryptocurrency or one of them might get taken up one day. , neither of which will happen, as the market determines. or B) Admit they are useless shit and have them added to Ant as an exchangeable derivative, but at A price at least. also it sorts out the problem of Dev monopoly because other Developers do exist and they will submit their failed currency to Ant also . interestingly -also the obvious will happen devs that know they are creating useless shit will create currency just to add to Ant , because they will see it as having an inherit value , in this way you will need to be able to control "inflation" . - if it is done smartly then you could solve the problem of spam crypto being created for the sake of it .
|
- Twitter @Kolin_Quark
|
|
|
digitalindustry
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 01, 2013, 04:10:13 PM |
|
Ha HA what about a reverse pyramid?
Ok so the first batch of "Coins" can be valued as a group - based on the information in the market today we have to say "some are spam some might not be"
so we exist in this reality so those coins are valued at a = to "No chance to exchange" of say oh lets call it 1 to simplify.
then you have cause an inherit motive in the information market to create a "coin" and submit it to Ant.
so any subsequent batch has to be valued at lower than this , and the equation is simple reverse pyramid -
First batch 1111111111111111111111111111111 < this is the number in the first batch they all get valued at the same = "no chance to exchange value"
i'm just putting more than one "1" to express the number of currencies int he first batch
Second batch 0.03125
this number is derived by the amount of "coins" that are submitted < i.e there are 32 new pieces of crap released < the devs admit it divide 1 / 32 = 0.03125. all the second batch of currencies are now valued at 0.03125
Third batch 0.0020833333333333
15 more spam currencies that failed to get to an exchange , Dev(s) admits it -
0.03125 / 15 = 0.0020833333333333
Fourth Batch - The spam continues - 0.0010415
2 more spam come and greet our shores - 0.0020833333333333/ 2 = 0.0010415
so on so fourth - ?
|
- Twitter @Kolin_Quark
|
|
|
digitalindustry
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 01, 2013, 04:16:44 PM |
|
this is a very nice an simple solution -
and it solves :
Cryptsy having to asses these currencies - but still can, but it helps excahnges a lot as if the Dev is 1. absent or 2. has not faith to exchange, why would you ever list that?
then if there is a Dev revolt by one particular Dev , and all those coins are not added then its likely they are worthless anyhow.
there will invariably be currencies pulled that the community believes has merit - these are the currencies that Cryptsy and other exchanges can look at and asses.
|
- Twitter @Kolin_Quark
|
|
|
barwizi (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 882
Merit: 1000
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 01, 2013, 04:24:24 PM |
|
Ha HA what about a reverse pyramid?
Ok so the first batch of "Coins" can be valued as a group - based on the information in the market today we have to say "some are spam some might not be"
so we exist in this reality so those coins are valued at a = to "No chance to exchange" of say oh lets call it 1 to simplify.
then you have cause an inherit motive in the information market to create a "coin" and submit it to Ant.
so any subsequent batch has to be valued at lower than this , and the equation is simple reverse pyramid -
First batch 1111111111111111111111111111111 < this is the number in the first batch they all get valued at the same = "no chance to exchange value"
i'm just putting more than one "1" to express the number of currencies int he first batch
Second batch 0.03125
this number is derived by the amount of "coins" that are submitted < i.e there are 32 new pieces of crap released < the devs admit it divide 1 / 32 = 0.03125. all the second batch of currencies are now valued at 0.03125
Third batch 0.0020833333333333
15 more spam currencies that failed to get to an exchange , Dev(s) admits it -
0.03125 / 15 = 0.0020833333333333
Fourth Batch - The spam continues - 0.0010415
2 more spam come and greet our shores - 0.0020833333333333/ 2 = 0.0010415
so on so fourth - ?
wow, what a great valuation idea, this is becoming a reality faster and faster.
|
|
|
|
r3wt
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 01, 2013, 04:40:10 PM |
|
You know, its really great to see a community brainstorm as a group to bring a great idea like this to fruition. I can't provide much in the way of dev since i'm currently busy with my own projects, but you do have %100 of my support. Swing for the fences bro.
r3wt
|
My negative trust rating is reflective of a personal vendetta by someone on default trust.
|
|
|
barwizi (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 882
Merit: 1000
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 01, 2013, 04:58:17 PM |
|
ok, can we also take into consideration the amounts of coin the others have? For instance infinitecoin and zwcoin have absurd block rewards. I do not believe ANT should have a extremely large number of coin, i know devcoin does it, but it just seems messy.
|
|
|
|
digitalindustry
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 01, 2013, 05:00:46 PM |
|
Yeah i think this reverses the motive to create spam - of course if there is no motive then some of that will continue , but interestingly ha ha after the first batch - the Devs will know that the more spam that is created and admitted to then the less value it will have so they have a paradoxical question : A) Create the spam and don't admit it is spam, ( then the market will know , or call it spam) B) Don't create as much spam but admit to it and have it valued higher inside Ant. ha ha , i like those options r3wt. what is nano all about? i'll do a giveaway , I'll do it on digitalcurrencytalk.com I'm trusted in this forum and that forum.
|
- Twitter @Kolin_Quark
|
|
|
digitalindustry
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 01, 2013, 05:03:56 PM Last edit: July 01, 2013, 05:18:46 PM by digitalindustry |
|
ok, can we also take into consideration the amounts of coin the others have? For instance infinitecoin and zwcoin have absurd block rewards. I do not believe ANT should have a extremely large number of coin, i know devcoin does it, but it just seems messy.
yes this needs to be done indeed. - so wait , is infinite-coin literally never ending with huge block rewards ? this would be cause to throw to a "viable currency vote" if the forum believes its not viable then it is excluded - however then with the other currencies the total cap would need to be looked at , hmm need to think on this . .. ok so the Ant is there and at the start he has say 34 Legs - 34 Devs admit that = "no chance to exchange" so in each leg of the Ant goes each currency valued at exactly the same value. this value adds up and creates a ratio downward the more that goes in ? so maybe the same principal : i will take two examples : Currency A has a very large block reward Currency B has a very low block reward - the Gem and Bitbar type both are submitted to the Ant leg Leg 1 - large block reward is valued at 1 (in the first batch) with the first unit being valued at that in the ant body as more come in it divides the unit down Leg 2 - small block reward comes in at 1 (in the first batch) with the next coming in much more slowly but dividing down as they do Sum all legs to get final Ant value? then rinse and repeat - the next batch will have legs of lesser value that get divided in the same way, yes? does this work ? but as Ant is trade-able there will be the Ant number and the Ant Value - that's what makes it fun . but in this way you could still make it a low number with its own Ant cap right ?
|
- Twitter @Kolin_Quark
|
|
|
digitalindustry
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 01, 2013, 05:19:20 PM |
|
Chat soon on this , need maybe more input.
|
- Twitter @Kolin_Quark
|
|
|
Online24o0n
Member
![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif)
Offline
Activity: 98
Merit: 10
"Ignorance never settles a question."
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 01, 2013, 06:06:21 PM |
|
does it act as a unifying currency?
|
"Never let the future disturb you. You will meet it, if you have to, with the same weapons of reason which today arm you against the present" - Marcus Aurelius
|
|
|
Breen2543
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 01, 2013, 06:11:55 PM |
|
Currency A has a very large block reward Currency B has a very low block reward - the Gem and Bitbar type
|
|
|
|
barwizi (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 882
Merit: 1000
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 01, 2013, 06:12:15 PM |
|
yes it is a unifying currency.
|
|
|
|
barwizi (OP)
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 882
Merit: 1000
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 01, 2013, 06:13:54 PM |
|
ok, can we also take into consideration the amounts of coin the others have? For instance infinitecoin and zwcoin have absurd block rewards. I do not believe ANT should have a extremely large number of coin, i know devcoin does it, but it just seems messy.
yes this needs to be done indeed. - so wait , is infinite-coin literally never ending with huge block rewards ? this would be cause to throw to a "viable currency vote" if the forum believes its not viable then it is excluded - however then with the other currencies the total cap would need to be looked at , hmm need to think on this . .. ok so the Ant is there and at the start he has say 34 Legs - 34 Devs admit that = "no chance to exchange" so in each leg of the Ant goes each currency valued at exactly the same value. this value adds up and creates a ratio downward the more that goes in ? so maybe the same principal : i will take two examples : Currency A has a very large block reward Currency B has a very low block reward - the Gem and Bitbar type both are submitted to the Ant leg Leg 1 - large block reward is valued at 1 (in the first batch) with the first unit being valued at that in the ant body as more come in it divides the unit down Leg 2 - small block reward comes in at 1 (in the first batch) with the next coming in much more slowly but dividing down as they do Sum all legs to get final Ant value? then rinse and repeat - the next batch will have legs of lesser value that get divided in the same way, yes? does this work ? but as Ant is trade-able there will be the Ant number and the Ant Value - that's what makes it fun . but in this way you could still make it a low number with its own Ant cap right ? let me think on this.
|
|
|
|
MaGNeT
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1526
Merit: 1002
Waves | 3PHMaGNeTJfqFfD4xuctgKdoxLX188QM8na
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
July 01, 2013, 06:24:55 PM |
|
It will only be a success if I can explain it to my mother.
Too complicated, I think. You guys?
|
|
|
|
|