Ok. I'm back. Here's my shot an answering all these questions:
1.
Completely missed that.
Too bad you didn't bump the old MasterCoin thread, I might have jumped on your offer
In any case, I'm currently not looking to co-found it, but might serve on the board of trustees if you'd like.
I will not require any salary from the board, and you, as the main developer/founder, will be entitled to some agreed upon salary.
I think Meni Rosenfeld might also be interested to serve on such a board.
Of course, if you decide you do not need a board and want to be the treasurer yourself, that's fine too. Also, for the initial fundraising, an m-of-n address is not strictly required - you can always transfer the funds to such an address later. The fundraiser might be more productive (because of the greater trust) if it started with a trusted board and an m-of-n address. Now that I think about it, you can even release an update to the protocol that changes / adds a new Exodus Address while the fundraiser is still going (it would make the protocol less 'clean', but there are benefits).
Anyway, I'm just trying to benefit MasterCoin here, no hidden agenda of myself, feel free to decide what you feel is best.
2.
FYI, I just posted about this thread
in the alt forum.
3.
I wouldn't mind spending some time editing the whitepaper for added clarity (like I have too much free time
), assuming it is in a format where you can indeed easily see and verify my edits. I voiced most of the points I'd like to edit above.
4.
How about MSC as the abbreviation? (FYI MST is taken by the usurper)
You could brand the coin it as an M.Sc. student
5.
Good news - I have just registered mastercoin.org on behalf of the project!
I can't believe you haven't registered that domain already in the last year...
For now I made it a redirect to this thread.
I kind of like what Sunny King has done with ppcoin.org and primecoin.org - you might consider doing something similar with mastercoin.org
6.
FYI, I posted about MasterCoin in the Hebrew Bitcoin forums (Facebook, Google Group), and made
a short article on our wiki. There is some positive interest.
Ripper, you are the best. Really man. Thanks for registering Mastercoin.org - I thought about registering ExodusAddress.com or something like that, but I figured if I was successful, I would just come up with a name for my company and register that instead. I think maybe the first use of Exodus Address funds when September 1st rolls around should be to reimburse your purchase.
I tried really hard to get the Bitcoin Foundation to hold the funds, but they were too busy. I also asked various bitcoin companies if they would hold the funds and pay me as an employee, but they all wanted me to work on THEIR projects
I like MSC. There are probably a bunch that will work.
I really appreciate your comments on the paper - I'll work on a slightly modified version incorporating some of those suggestions at some point. It seems right now that my biggest concern should be producing some source code
Also, in case you missed my question about blockchain.info - it would be nice to get a formal reassurance that blockchain.info addresses are ok for investing in the fundraiser. I see no reason why they won't be, but in light of your comment in the paper, a reply from you on this matter would be great.
I guess I did miss that question. My understanding is that blockchain.info uses client-side JavaScript rather than a hosted wallet, so it should be ok. I updated the OP with a comment to that effect.
Increasing supply to decrease price is the easy part. Decreasing supply to increase price is the impossible part.
Definitely agree that figuring out how to decrease supply was the hardest part (Did you notice that I did it a lot differently in this revision?)
This is a bit of a concern. I skimmed through the white paper and saw the plans for moderating supply and using an escrow reservoir.
It all seems a bit... Norman Lamont-y though.... I understand the escrow aggression level, but the escrow will still behave entirely predictably, right? As such, what's stopping rich people trading against it?
Maybe I just don't see the attraction of artificially stable commodities.
Here in the States we say "Ben Bernanke-esque"
Yes, the escrow fund will behave predictably. People will absolutely trade based on what they anticipate it will do, but that is trading FOR the escrow fund, not against it. You'd be doing the escrow fund's job, and making some money too
I don't exactly understand what a mastercoin will be worth. Is each mastercoin the same?
and is total supply going to be limited by the total MSC bought by sept 1?
can you only buy MSC with BTC? I think so due to its blockchain layered protocol, but can you explain this again for me
what secures a derived currency like gold coin's worth with the example of an ounce of gold? my main question is, where does that ounce of gold sit to secure such a gold coin?
1) Yes
2) Yes, +10%
3) Yes. Only way to purchase is with Bitcoin, because this is completely traceable by anyone parsing the block chain
4) Good question! My hypothesis is that you can store funds in escrow to back that ounce of Gold, rather than a real ounce of Gold.
You claim to be running a crowdfunder, but what I fail to understand is what you expect to use these funds on. You try to calm down concerned people by saying you're also buying a lot of mastercoins, but you do realize I too can send a lot of bitcoins to another wallet which I control, and still maintain control?
There seems to be a rush in getting people to send you money and several flaws in your paper. I'm gonna have to sit this one out. I wish you had waited and developed something beforehand.
Yes, I will still control the funds I use to purchase MasterCoins. That's why I can go all in, while the rest of you have to decide if I'm nuts, a scammer, or maybe could really pull this off
I would like to emphasize that, since you control the exodus address, it is important that you buy only few mastercoins and furthermore that you are completely transparent about how much you buy. Of course, this doesn't apply to buying them on the free market later.
As implied above, I actually intend to buy a large number of them - probably around 24 hours after the announcement. I really believe this will work, and I want to own as many of them as possible.
Why are you releasing this project if it is clearly not ready/fully tested?
Funding it like a kickstarter.
especially after 2 years of already working on it? What do you need now that you didn't need before?
or is it because it is the mechanism by which you can bootstrap the network? I still do not fully understand the mechanisms that allow the protocol to do what your claims say, but I am still trying very hard to.
I got tired of waiting for someone else to implement my paper (first draft was published January 6th 2012), so I decided to give it a shot.
Why didn't you just create a Kickstarter?
This method provides in-chain traceability of which addresses funded the project. Also, regular kickstarter doesn't accept projects collecting money as investments. (Bitcoin kickstarter probably would though)
The other reason is that I don't really have a target amount of funds I am aiming for. I'll be doing the work either way, but I can do it faster if I raise some cash.
I see a problem: protocol only works for a client which scans whole blockchain.
Secure thin clients (similar to SPV clients like Electrum, MultiBit) are fundamentally impossible.
And running full node client like Bitcoin-Qt will soon be very challenging,
Hey Alex. I think think if this is successful then it will be possible to make thin clients. For instance, the code scanning the block chain doesn't need to run in the same place as the code signing the transactions.
Aside: killerstorm is the primary dev working on colored coins, who came up with the term "meta-stable" after reading my first draft. He is awesome.
Bitcoin buys 1000 MasterCoins (plus a bonus based on how early you buy).
Edit:
The White paper says 100x So a Bitcoin = 100 can you clarify this
Oops! I fixed the OP to say 100. Thanks!
If the coin has any merit and the user numbers are therefore growing, you don't need to decrease the supply, you only need to limit it.
That works great until something better comes along. I want the meta-stable coins to fail gracefully.
This escrow fund system is not going to work. What it is trying to do is act like a central bank that pegs its currency to the dollar. Sure the fund can print up more currency to try to bring down the price, just like central banks do, but it cannot just keep on buying up GoldCoins using bitcoins or it is going to go broke. The value of GoldCoins will be dependent on people's faith in the reserves of the escrow fund, which will be non-existent. The only way you can get this faith is to have a reputable person or government with a lot of money fund the escrow. No large backer would ever agree to fund an escrow that uses a fixed adjustment mechanism, because they would be manipulated into being broke. Read up on what happened to the Thai Baht in 1997, when massive speculative attacks ran the central bank out of reserves and forced it to abandon its peg to the dollar. Whoever controls the ticker for the price of gold can also manipulate the currency and must be trusted as well.
How well the escrow fund will work remains to be seen. The challenge will come when a lot of people want to exit one of these meta-stable currencies all at once because something better came along. Something better WILL eventually come along (tomorrow or in a thousand years), and when a currency does fail, I want it to do so as gracefully as possible.
