Bitcoin Forum
December 02, 2016, 10:39:26 PM *
News: To be able to use the next phase of the beta forum software, please ensure that your email address is correct/functional.
 
   Home   Help Search Donate Login Register  
Poll
Question: Think that over the next 1-3 years there will be one or more clones Bitcoin? Open Source, as Namecoin, and with what success? One of the big companies  (a corporation or bank or carrier)  will create one (for, eg., of the Android bitcoin)? Or use Bitcoin?  (Voting closed: July 27, 2011, 09:08:16 AM)
No, no corporation wants to use it and Bitcoin is so well established to make a clone failed as Namecoin at least the next year - 5 (16.7%)
No, no company will use it as a system of payment and banking systems such as Google will use NFC - 1 (3.3%)
No, no company will use it as a payment system for micropayments, and will use phone bills - 0 (0%)
No, no company will use it as a payment system and create their proprietary electronic money, exchangeable with the dollar (such as Second Life's Linden dollars) - 1 (3.3%)
No, no company will use it as a payment system and create their proprietary electronic money, not exchangeable with the dollar (such as Facebook credit, or Microsoft Point) - 4 (13.3%)
Yes, a clone with a success comparable to Bitcoin because it adds some useful feature (not as a feature that adds Namecoin failed because of the lack of interconnection of their DNS) - 6 (20%)
Yes, at least one big company will rely on Bitcoin as a system of payment but will not mining Bitcoin - 9 (30%)
Yes, at least one big company will rely on Bitcoin as payment system and mining Bitcoin - 2 (6.7%)
Yes, at least one big company will rely on Bitcoin as payment system and mining Bitcoin clone like Namecoin (based on satoshi's paper) - 0 (0%)
Yes, at least one big company will rely on Bitcoin as your payment and create their proprietary currency, exchangeable in Bitcoin - 0 (0%)
Yes, at least one big company will rely on Bitcoin as your payment currency and create their proprietary, non-exchangeable in Bitcoin - 2 (6.7%)
Total Voters: 30

Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Do you think there will be a clone of bitcoin? and corporation will do what?  (Read 1834 times)
goemon888
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 267



View Profile WWW
July 12, 2011, 09:08:16 AM
 #1

(sorry for my limited english)

Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1480718366
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480718366

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480718366
Reply with quote  #2

1480718366
Report to moderator
1480718366
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480718366

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480718366
Reply with quote  #2

1480718366
Report to moderator
1480718366
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1480718366

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1480718366
Reply with quote  #2

1480718366
Report to moderator
cunicula
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756


Stack-overflow Guru


View Profile WWW
July 12, 2011, 09:36:26 AM
 #2

In my opinion, introduction of innovations through cloning is the number one threat to bitcoin.

I think there will be a clone that includes at least the following features:
a) mining for regular coins
b) mining for bond coins (i.e. tradeable securities that the blockchain converts into regular coins at a future date)
c) splitting of bond coins into derivative coins (i.e. tradeable securities that the blockchain converts into regular coins at a future date if certain block chain conditions are met (e.g. difficulty levels, transaction volumes). A set of derivative coins which spans the entire domain of future conditions is equivalent to a bond coin.)
d) Threshold-protected wallets (wallets that allow for daily send limits and an unlimited emergency cash-out address. Both the send limits and the cash-out address would be specified by the user at wallet creation and could not be changed subsequently.)
e) other features people haven't thought of yet.

It would be much better for digital currency if these features were developed as a fork in the bitcoin blockchain rather than as bitcoin clones. Development of successful clones undermines faith in the ability of digital currencies to store of value. Development of a successful forks allows pre-fork currency holders to have their wealth grandfathered in. Forking preserves the ability of digital currencies to store value, while allowing for innovation.

▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁
        AltCoinInternalExperts                Get Your Altcoin Promoted On Social Media       
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
zby
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1429


View Profile
July 12, 2011, 10:46:33 AM
 #3

What I would like to see is a clone that would get rid of the wastefulness of mining or use mining for something useful like folding at home or something. The only cryptographic purpose of the mining is to time-stamp the transactions - with a central server this could be done with one machine instead of this massive array of mining computers.   It is probably impossible in a completely decentralized protocol - but maybe it is possible to have a clever compromise that would introduce a few super-nodes with additional checks and balances on them to do that job. 
hugolp
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 742



View Profile
July 12, 2011, 10:55:17 AM
 #4

What I would like to see is a clone that would get rid of the wastefulness of mining or use mining for something useful like folding at home or something. The only cryptographic purpose of the mining is to time-stamp the transactions - with a central server this could be done with one machine instead of this massive array of mining computers.   It is probably impossible in a completely decentralized protocol - but maybe it is possible to have a clever compromise that would introduce a few super-nodes with additional checks and balances on them to do that job. 

Thats exactly the point. Mining is used to secure the network. Its not useless or wastefulness.
zby
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1429


View Profile
July 12, 2011, 11:31:55 AM
 #5

Mining is used to secure the network. Its not useless or wastefulness.
With a central server you can have even more secure time stamps using one machine instead of a vast network of computers to do that job.  In that sense the protocol is wasteful - it uses huge resources for something that can be done with very little.  Sure it would not be exactly the same thing - it would be an alternative Smiley
nvmind
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 14


View Profile
July 12, 2011, 12:04:58 PM
 #6

Quote
With a central server you can have even more secure time stamps using one machine instead of a vast network of computers to do that job.  In that sense the protocol is wasteful - it uses huge resources for something that can be done with very little.  Sure it would not be exactly the same thing - it would be an alternative
And all in the control of one source, why even bother? The current money systems do this just fine.
ctoon6
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 350



View Profile
July 12, 2011, 12:12:08 PM
 #7

In my opinion, introduction of innovations through cloning is the number one threat to bitcoin.

I think there will be a clone that includes at least the following features:
a) mining for regular coins
b) mining for bond coins (i.e. tradeable securities that the blockchain converts into regular coins at a future date)
c) splitting of bond coins into derivative coins (i.e. tradeable securities that the blockchain converts into regular coins at a future date if certain block chain conditions are met (e.g. difficulty levels, transaction volumes). A set of derivative coins which spans the entire domain of future conditions is equivalent to a bond coin.)
d) Threshold-protected wallets (wallets that allow for daily send limits and an unlimited emergency cash-out address. Both the send limits and the cash-out address would be specified by the user at wallet creation and could not be changed subsequently.)
e) other features people haven't thought of yet.

It would be much better for digital currency if these features were developed as a fork in the bitcoin blockchain rather than as bitcoin clones. Development of successful clones undermines faith in the ability of digital currencies to store of value. Development of a successful forks allows pre-fork currency holders to have their wealth grandfathered in. Forking preserves the ability of digital currencies to store value, while allowing for innovation.


What is the point of bondcoins, and how would you enforce the threshold.

zby
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1429


View Profile
July 12, 2011, 12:24:06 PM
 #8

Quote
With a central server you can have even more secure time stamps using one machine instead of a vast network of computers to do that job.  In that sense the protocol is wasteful - it uses huge resources for something that can be done with very little.  Sure it would not be exactly the same thing - it would be an alternative
And all in the control of one source, why even bother? The current money systems do this just fine.
What if that could be done in a decentralized manner?  The one central server is just a proof that this can be done in some way - but this is not the goal.  What I would expect is that you can have a timestamping protocol with multiple super-nodes (not unlike those that are proposed as adaptations of the bitcoin protocol to handle bigger traffic) with many checks and balances, some of them probably outside of the protocol (just like now outside of the bitcoin protocol you have distribution of the block chain 'checkpoints' into bitcoin clients).  Control over timestamping does not mean 'all control' over the system - the timestamping server does not need to know what it is signing.

ctoon6
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 350



View Profile
July 12, 2011, 12:37:57 PM
 #9

what if the time stamp server is compromised and starts stamping sept 11 2001 08:46 on all the blocks. what if one of the employees were drunk and tripped over the power cable. what if terrorists wanted to stop all global financial trade and crashed plane into the building.

This is why i like bitcoin, none of the above is possible short of a large EMP(very very very LARGE).

cunicula
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 756


Stack-overflow Guru


View Profile WWW
July 12, 2011, 02:07:44 PM
 #10

In my opinion, introduction of innovations through cloning is the number one threat to bitcoin.

I think there will be a clone that includes at least the following features:
a) mining for regular coins
b) mining for bond coins (i.e. tradeable securities that the blockchain converts into regular coins at a future date)
c) splitting of bond coins into derivative coins (i.e. tradeable securities that the blockchain converts into regular coins at a future date if certain block chain conditions are met (e.g. difficulty levels, transaction volumes). A set of derivative coins which spans the entire domain of future conditions is equivalent to a bond coin.)
d) Threshold-protected wallets (wallets that allow for daily send limits and an unlimited emergency cash-out address. Both the send limits and the cash-out address would be specified by the user at wallet creation and could not be changed subsequently.)
e) other features people haven't thought of yet.

It would be much better for digital currency if these features were developed as a fork in the bitcoin blockchain rather than as bitcoin clones. Development of successful clones undermines faith in the ability of digital currencies to store of value. Development of a successful forks allows pre-fork currency holders to have their wealth grandfathered in. Forking preserves the ability of digital currencies to store value, while allowing for innovation.




What is the point of bondcoins, and how would you enforce the threshold.



Short Answer:
Bond coins facilitate financial contracts which span a long time period.

For example, in this thread [http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=18205.0] a company is issuing private bonds to fund a project. The company promised to pay 1 bitcoin on Dec 31, 2011 for every 0.8 bitcoins invested by bondholders today. Currently, the company needs to accumulate current bitcoins to pay off this debt. Suppose that the company accumulates bondcoins with a maturity of Dec 31 instead. Based on the poll I made here [http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=25705.0], bondcoins with a half a year maturity might sell at a discount of 10% (i.e. 0.9 bitcoins trades for 1 half-year bondcoin). If so (and assuming the company has a constant revenue stream), the company would save around 5 percent of its financing costs by accumulating bond coins rather than bitcoins. This would reduce the interest rate the company faces from 25% to 19%.

This is just one example. Essentially, the same logic applies to any long-term contract demoninated in bitcoin.

Longer Answer:
A second point of bondcoins is facilitating the creation of derivative coins. Derivative coins address issues with compensating large merchants for adopting bitcoin and helping merchants manage bitcoin exchange rate risk. My ideas about derivative coins (aka contingent claims) are described here: http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=19130.0


Regarding the threshold, that is a programming question. I'm not a programmer. I bet the current developers could manage it if they set their minds to it, however.

▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁▁
        AltCoinInternalExperts                Get Your Altcoin Promoted On Social Media       
▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔▔
ampkZjWDQcqT
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70


GNU is not UNIX


View Profile
July 12, 2011, 06:32:42 PM
 #11

It is probably impossible in a completely decentralized protocol - but maybe it is possible to have a clever compromise that would introduce a few super-nodes with [...]

You're totally missing the point.

If you found my comment useful please express your gratitude by doing an action of similar magnitude towards a better society. Thanks you!.
Rassah
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1624


Director of Bitcoin100


View Profile
July 12, 2011, 07:19:38 PM
 #12

I think if you look at Bitcoin as a protocol, and not as a single technology, you'll see that the likelyhood of a clone is almost zero. By protocol I mean like SMPT for e-mail or HTTP for websites is a protocol. After more than two decades, we still don't have a "clone" of email. The protocol itself has improved, and many services have built up around it, but the "e-mail" protocol is still there. I think the same will happen with Bitcoin: why bother making something completely new when you have a large networked system already there to improve and build upon?

ampkZjWDQcqT
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70


GNU is not UNIX


View Profile
July 12, 2011, 07:28:35 PM
 #13

I think if you look at Bitcoin as a protocol, and not as a single technology, you'll see that the likelyhood of a clone is almost zero. By protocol I mean like SMPT for e-mail or HTTP for websites is a protocol. After more than two decades, we still don't have a "clone" of email. The protocol itself has improved, and many services have built up around it, but the "e-mail" protocol is still there. I think the same will happen with Bitcoin: why bother making something completely new when you have a large networked system already there to improve and build upon?

Early adopters have an intrinsic advantage in any protocol/implementation resembling Bitcoin. This is a factor not present in your examples.

BTW: Don't you mean the Simple Mail Transference Protocol, that's SMTP. Hehe, I used to confuse them too (You wrote SMPT) Cheesy.

If you found my comment useful please express your gratitude by doing an action of similar magnitude towards a better society. Thanks you!.
wumpus
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 798

No Maps for These Territories


View Profile
July 12, 2011, 07:32:06 PM
 #14

No, I don't think it is a threat. Any bitcoin clone pushed by a corporation will be centralized, and will not have the intrinsic advantage of bitcoin. It would simply be another Paypal.

Bitcoin Core developer [PGP] Warning: For most, coin loss is a larger risk than coin theft. A disk can die any time. Regularly back up your wallet through FileBackup Wallet to an external storage or the (encrypted!) cloud. Use a separate offline wallet for storing larger amounts.
ampkZjWDQcqT
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 70


GNU is not UNIX


View Profile
July 12, 2011, 07:34:42 PM
 #15

No, I don't think it is a threat. Any bitcoin clone pushed by a corporation will be centralized, and will not have the intrinsic advantage of bitcoin. It would simply be another Paypal.

Please note whether a Bitcoin-like system is pushed by a corporation is unrelated to whether it's controlled by such corporation.

If you found my comment useful please express your gratitude by doing an action of similar magnitude towards a better society. Thanks you!.
zby
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1429


View Profile
July 12, 2011, 07:53:19 PM
 #16

It is probably impossible in a completely decentralized protocol - but maybe it is possible to have a clever compromise that would introduce a few super-nodes with [...]

You're totally missing the point.

Care to explain that?
Bitcoin Swami
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 168


View Profile
July 12, 2011, 08:40:10 PM
 #17

I see more localized versions showing up in the future.  Maybe states will start their own type of bitcoins.  Bitcoins will always be the head honcho though.  Then again what do I know.
Stephen Gornick
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1988



View Profile
July 12, 2011, 10:42:55 PM
 #18

What I would like to see is a clone that would get rid of the wastefulness of mining

Here you go:
 - http://forum.bitcoin.org/index.php?topic=9493.0

Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Sponsored by , a Bitcoin-accepting VPN.
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!