Fair Profit for Coin Founders

[Zas]

Most of the coins I see here are clones of Bitcoin... unless you've designed it from the ground up, in reality you have done no work. Therefore it's the miners who are mining the coins, confirming the transactions and so on. The 'creator' has done quite literally nothing, except hoping to cash in on a coin that offers nothing new... that's just wrong.

Litecoin is a bit different on the other hand, if they have developers working on it to make it different from Bitcoin, then good for them, they can feel free to ask for donations or use whatever charging system they want. However the market...as we see here... won't bear anyone trying to do pump and dump schemes. There shouldn't 'be' an incentive to create a currency. The currency should be 'needed' to fit a market in order to better facilitate trade (one of the reasons why Bitcoin has took off so well). Each incentive offered will devalue the currency because it then means that those who are genuinely interested in the currency won't be able to take part because they don't have super computers, therein destroying the 'decentralized' nature of a coin. (This also applies to Bitcoin). Most people don't 'have' huge computers with six graphic cards, asics, and so on and so forth so there's no real prospect of them getting involved with mining. This is one of the things that has excluded me from Bitcoin as there's no way for me to get involved.

Google offered its search engine for free. It still IS free. Google also offer another service called 'advertising', which businesses then pay for. Thereby a symbiotic relationship where one activity provides for the other. This goes back to my earlier point about not actually doing anything. Google on the other hand designed their code from the ground up. If a new currency creator did the same, then sure, they could try to find a way to monetize on that, but monetizing directly through premining, effectively ruins the whole point of getting a currency out there. Of course, you could easily just apply a merchants 'tax'...but again with that decentralized theme... the more decentralized a currency, the less profit you will be able to make because the less work you are doing.

[Vlad2Vlad]

But miners aren't exactly breaking their backs out there, doing "all the work."

And they're mining in their self interest and most have their hardware paid off in the first few months.  They leave it on and go about their lives.  The electricity is paid for in the equation..

You make it sound like miners are coal mining.  Lol

Fact is, if not for developers, miners wouldn't have such opportunities and if you want newer and better coins to come out then there must be some good incentive, and it seems like some people are communistic about this, they think devs shouldn't get anything.

Let's get real.  Let's be fair.

[thekidcoin]

Bitcoin, Litecoin, PPC had no developer fee, or premine.  Any new coin is competing against that.

Don't worry though premine if you want or do something as asinine as give developer 25% of all mined coins into perpetuity.  It doesn't really matter, there is always someone willing to mine the next coin nobody how limited or short of a lifespan it has.

thats total BS.  The creator of Bitcoin pre-mined a ton.  Also a little bird told me GPU mining on Litecoin was available to a select few very early on.

[thekidcoin]

The whiners expect a dev to release a coin, then support it, and get nothing out of it.  Any dev that doesn't pre-mine at leave 1/10th of a percent is an idiot IMHO.

[Zas]

The whiners expect a dev to release a coin, then support it, and get nothing out of it.  Any dev that doesn't pre-mine at leave 1/10th of a percent is an idiot IMHO.

Support? Nah. I expect it to be decentralized and released open source. Although I probably should look into the cost of money, much like the cost of politics, no one really thinks about it as an object but more an idea. But I don't think that devs or anyone else for that matter should be able to make money out of money. There's no point in that.

I don't think that Dev's should be paid simply for outlining the basis of money, especially when most alt-coins are simply bitcoin clones. If they wish it, they could charge for the distribution of the client, which protects their software...or lines of code they have written. Provided it's something new and not just a rehash of other peoples hard work.

[Vlad2Vlad]

The whiners expect a dev to release a coin, then support it, and get nothing out of it.  Any dev that doesn't pre-mine at leave 1/10th of a percent is an idiot IMHO.

Amin, brother.  That's what I'm saying.  Too much hating going on toward the devs.  These devs provide coins for people so they can make money while at the beach.  That's the reward for miners so where's the reward for devs wince they're doing all the work?

[Vlad2Vlad]

The whiners expect a dev to release a coin, then support it, and get nothing out of it.  Any dev that doesn't pre-mine at leave 1/10th of a percent is an idiot IMHO.

Support? Nah. I expect it to be decentralized and released open source. Although I probably should look into the cost of money, much like the cost of politics, no one really thinks about it as an object but more an idea. But I don't think that devs or anyone else for that matter should be able to make money out of money. There's no point in that.

Without the devs these coins die.  Where do you think bounties come from?  Who's gonna work for free to support and improve a coin? 

[DeathAndTaxes]

Bitcoin, Litecoin, PPC had no developer fee, or premine.  Any new coin is competing against that.

Don't worry though premine if you want or do something as asinine as give developer 25% of all mined coins into perpetuity.  It doesn't really matter, there is always someone willing to mine the next coin nobody how limited or short of a lifespan it has.

thats total BS.  The creator of Bitcoin pre-mined a ton.  

Lie all you want but the blockchain doesn't lie.  There was no premine in Bitcoin.  Satoshi published the paper nearly a year before the client.  The Genesis block (block 0) was worth 50 BTC but due to a bug in the mainline client it is unspendable.  Bitcoin remained at difficulty 1 (only because it can't go any lower) for the first year due to lack of interest.  Anyone with just about any computer could have mined 5%+ or the available coins in the first year just by running the client ... almost nobody did.

So where is this so called "premine"?

[DeathAndTaxes]

The whiners expect a dev to release a coin, then support it, and get nothing out of it.  Any dev that doesn't pre-mine at leave 1/10th of a percent is an idiot IMHO.

Support? Nah. I expect it to be decentralized and released open source. Although I probably should look into the cost of money, much like the cost of politics, no one really thinks about it as an object but more an idea. But I don't think that devs or anyone else for that matter should be able to make money out of money. There's no point in that.

Without the devs these coins die.  Where do you think bounties come from?  Who's gonna work for free to support and improve a coin? 

In the only two successful coins (BTC & LTC) to date bounties have come from users, miners, coinholders.  Someone wants X done but they lack the skills for X.  They find out a lot of other people wants X done as well.  They pool resources and offer a bounty for someone to complete X.

[Zas]

As I said, release it open source. If a coin dies, then it means it wasn't worth it anyway. If someone wants to see something succeed then they'll put all the hard work and graft into it. If they want any returns on it, then they'll need to think about how they're going to get paid for it before hand. I.e selling clients or mining software just for instance. The way that most alt-coins gather theirs by pre-mining, just stinks of a scam.

[Vlad2Vlad]

The whiners expect a dev to release a coin, then support it, and get nothing out of it.  Any dev that doesn't pre-mine at leave 1/10th of a percent is an idiot IMHO.

Support? Nah. I expect it to be decentralized and released open source. Although I probably should look into the cost of money, much like the cost of politics, no one really thinks about it as an object but more an idea. But I don't think that devs or anyone else for that matter should be able to make money out of money. There's no point in that.

Without the devs these coins die.  Where do you think bounties come from?  Who's gonna work for free to support and improve a coin? 

In the only two successful coins (BTC & LTC) to date bounties have come from users, miners, coinholders.  Someone wants X done but they lack the skills for X.  They find out a lot of other people wants X done as well.  They pool resources and offer a bounty for someone to complete X.

Seriously?  That's amazing.  I really had no idea.  If that's the case then why don't the people launch a coin for the people. 

I mean a miner coin. A coin that benefits the small miners the most and not the guys with $50,000 rigs. 

I have an idea for a feature for a coin that would really help the little guy - level the playing field a bit.  Cause most miners are little guys.

And if you all can take care of your own coin I'll just pay for it and launch it for you and that's fine, I'll take just 1%.

[groll]

Like ixCoin, the guy only pre-mined 560K coins, out of 21 Million,

1/40 of the total money you know on 99.9% country (yes not Vatican  ) with that share of fiat you would be the richest of the country. if that was bitcoin it would be 35M$ value. most coin are copy paste 60-90% of scrypt coin had to realease a patch since they not even know enough to change the alert signature of litecoin so thay get alerts for litecoin client update in their coin client, so they do replace litecoin by XXcoin and change seeds 2-3 parameter then go.

25% are you kidding  especially premine is at start so only devs have coin on starting hype in trades.

But let be realistic, the current trend is i setup a coins in 2 weeks work(1 person) get 100K$ back in next 2 weeks by premine-instamine. wow that is a hell of high pay. that is one of the major point that is making lots of bad rep to alt coin at the moment. the current formulas they use is just give me your money especially when you see some dev are not even very active after launch.


yes dev should possibly get some rewards,  Add some value to the coins as service, exchange, excrow, market and then collect from those. can even be google ads on the sites.

emuni, primecoin and some other innovate and should get rewards, copy paste need to add something to get reward.

[Vlad2Vlad]

Like ixCoin, the guy only pre-mined 560K coins, out of 21 Million,

1/40 of the total money you know on 99.9% country (yes not Vatican  ) with that share of fiat you would be the richest of the country. if that was bitcoin it would be 35M$ value. most coin are copy paste 60-90% of scrypt coin had to realease a patch since they not even know enough to change the alert signature of litecoin so thay get alerts for litecoin client update in their coin client, so they do replace litecoin by XXcoin and change seeds 2-3 parameter then go.

25% are you kidding  especially premine is at start so only devs have coin on starting hype in trades.

But let be realistic, the current trend is i setup a coins in 2 weeks work(1 person) get 100K$ back in next 2 weeks by premine-instamine. wow that is a hell of high pay. that is one of the major point that is making lots of bad rep to alt coin at the moment. the current formulas they use is just give me your money especially when you see some dev are not even very active after launch.


yes dev should possibly get some rewards,  Add some value to the coins as service, exchange, excrow, market and then collect from those. can even be google ads on the sites.

emuni, primecoin and some other innovate and should get rewards, copy paste need to add something to get reward.

I'm totally against premine or instamine.  I said the only fair way is to pay a % of mined coins.  I said 25% cause I thought it was really expensive to launch a coin, over $10,000 but its not nearly that high.

And nobody has ever made $100,000 weeks after a launch.  It's not possible.  Maybe months and only in rare cases.

But I agree, premining is a clear pump and dump scheme.

I'm gonna do a poll to see how many people want a mining coin:  a coin for the miners, skewed to benefit the smaller miners the most, on a % basis.

[Zas]

Seriously?  That's amazing.  I really had no idea.  If that's the case then why don't the people launch a coin for the people. 

I mean a miner coin. A coin that benefits the small miners the most and not the guys with $50,000 rigs. 

I have an idea for a feature for a coin that would really help the little guy - level the playing field a bit.  Cause most miners are little guys.

And if you all can take care of your own coin I'll just pay for it and launch it for you and that's fine, I'll take just 1%.

If you're interested in putting together a coin that means everyone can have a share of the pie including the small miners, count me in. My problem with most of the current ones is that I simply just can't take part. My computer isn't powerful enough for the majority of these currencies and bitcoin is just impossible.

1% of what by the way? If I'm able to mine, I'd have no problem contributing some of what I've mined to the pot, that's not exactly an unreasonable request from my perspective.

Lets just bear in mind that my computer is a what...i4 equivalent processor *cough*ireallyneedtoupdatemymotherboard*cough* but I'd be happy ^_^;

[DeathAndTaxes]

I mean a miner coin. A coin that benefits the small miners the most and not the guys with $50,000 rigs. 

Maybe you aren't getting (like take a step back and look at the big picture) on the purpose of a crypto-currency.  The purpose of a currency is to facilitate trade without the need for the a trusted third party.

Mining is how the network achieves consensus and yes miners are "paid" for the service they provide.  Since the network is a real cost and a new currency needs some for of initial distribution it makes sense to kill two birds with one stone.  The protocol gives miners a subsidy (in the form of new coins) and that also achieves the initial controlled distribution.

However the point of mining is to secure the network. That is what miners are being paid for.  Without security it doesn't matter how many trillions of coins you have they are worthless.   

[Vlad2Vlad]

Seriously?  That's amazing.  I really had no idea.  If that's the case then why don't the people launch a coin for the people. 

I mean a miner coin. A coin that benefits the small miners the most and not the guys with $50,000 rigs. 

I have an idea for a feature for a coin that would really help the little guy - level the playing field a bit.  Cause most miners are little guys.

And if you all can take care of your own coin I'll just pay for it and launch it for you and that's fine, I'll take just 1%.

If you're interested in putting together a coin that means everyone can have a share of the pie including the small miners, count me in. My problem with most of the current ones is that I simply just can't take part. My computer isn't powerful enough for the majority of these currencies and bitcoin is just impossible.

1% of what by the way? If I'm able to mine, I'd have no problem contributing some of what I've mined to the pot, that's not exactly an unreasonable request from my perspective.

Lets just bear in mind that my computer is a what...i4 equivalent processor *cough*ireallyneedtoupdatemymotherboard*cough* but I'd be happy ^_^;

The coin I have in mind would help guys just like you.  I can't target just low hash-rate computers but I think my idea would at least give solo miners and the little guy a fighting chance.  An edge.  Not a huge advantage but an edge you currently don't have with any coin out there.  And it would also make mining more fun.

1% of mined coins.  You don't have to personally pitch in anything.

[Zas]

I mean a miner coin. A coin that benefits the small miners the most and not the guys with $50,000 rigs. 

Maybe you aren't getting (like take a step back and look at the big picture) on the purpose of a crypto-currency.  The purpose of a currency is to facilitate trade without the need for the a trusted third party.

Mining is how the network achieves consensus and yes miners are "paid" for the service they provide.  Since the network is a real cost and a new currency needs some for of initial distribution it makes sense to kill two birds with one stone.  The protocol gives miners a subsidy (in the form of new coins) and that also achieves the initial controlled distribution.

However the point of mining is to secure the network. That is what miners are being paid for.  Without security it doesn't matter how many trillions of coins you have they are worthless.   

I'm sorry...could you explain this to a newb such as myself? How do the miners provide security?

[Vlad2Vlad]

I mean a miner coin. A coin that benefits the small miners the most and not the guys with $50,000 rigs. 

Maybe you aren't getting (like take a step back and look at the big picture) on the purpose of a crypto-currency.  The purpose of a currency is to facilitate trade without the need for the a trusted third party.

Mining is how the network achieves consensus and yes miners are "paid" for the service they provide.  Since the network is a real cost and a new currency needs some for of initial distribution it makes sense to kill two birds with one stone.  The protocol gives miners a subsidy (in the form of new coins) and that also achieves the initial controlled distribution.

However the point of mining is to secure the network. That is what miners are being paid for.  Without security it doesn't matter how many trillions of coins you have they are worthless.   

I'm only saying I'd like to give the small miners a bit of an edge and make mining more exciting.

[DeathAndTaxes]

I'm only saying I'd like to give the small miners a bit of an edge and make mining more exciting.

Then large miners will simply appear on the network as multiple "small" miners are you are back where you started.

[Vlad2Vlad]

I'm only saying I'd like to give the small miners a bit of an edge and make mining more exciting.

Then large miners will simply appear on the network as multiple "small" miners are you are back where you started.

It wouldn't make any difference because the reward is in the relative nature if the overall results a miner gets and not anything to do with their equipment or network.  It's a reward feature and the less you earn mining the more rewarded you'll feel by this feature.

I don't wanna give it away cause I think it's a great idea but trust me, it would be fair to big miners and a bit more than fair to the small miners but the big miners would get the same exact rewards as the small miners.  A win-win for everyone.