[PPC] The Future of Peercoin - Sunny King

[magnificat_mafia]

ha, of course he said that, Sunny King and his friends premined millions of coins.  But don't worry, they will get richer at the same rate as everyone else....

[1713967039]

1713967039

[1713967039]

1713967039

[1713967039]

1713967039

[1713967039]

1713967039

[1713967039]

1713967039

[1713967039]

1713967039

[viriat0]

Agreed!

PXTeVKETY7nYm216eUwQn9XehtfCMFVRS5

thanks

[Digicoiner]

I agree.  Both those rich in PPC and poor in PPC increase their holdings through PoS.  It's also providing a service to the network.  Although it could lower the overall velocity of PPC which might not be a good thing although I'm not sure about that.

PFfhb9oEnpQY28HQt4FXhEKX1k9h91pVeB

Thanks

[PeercoinEnthusiast]

ha, of course he said that, Sunny King and his friends premined millions of coins.  But don't worry, they will get richer at the same rate as everyone else....

That is a lie. We proved there was not a premine at http://peercoinmyths.com/. 9 day announcement before launch, no pre-mine. Nice try.

[cc5alive]

Assuming the rich and poor are both saving, let's look at how PoS affects relative wealth.  Person A has 1000 PPC, B has 500 PPC, C has 98 PPC, D has 2 PPC.  There is a total of 1600 PPC in this example, thus the distribution of wealth is as follows:
A = 62.5%
B = 31.25%
C = 6.125%
D = 0.125%

Assuming that each person gains 1% interest (and yes, this simplifies priority of PoS minting determined by coin age), the new totals of each person are as follows:
A = 1010/1616 = 62.5%
B = 505/1616 = 31.25%
C = 98.98/1616 = 6.125%
D = 2/1616 = 0.125%

The main point here is that in its most simplified version, the rich and poor do increase wealth proportionately.


PPC
PMoc8U23c9FCft4m9N3Myqzdiv1SztTBtN

[Pitstop]

PLVexegF62BwgueGD9Nn4ptMobN16BA8e9  TKS

[KrLos]

I really think that the statment "the richier get richer and the poorer get also richier" is a really good one, cause is very diferent this system compared to the actual economical system, I totally agree with sunny's toughts.

PRYVVXHnh2RaMHoEV1jRUBwkBpKN9TLbuC

[flound1129]

Proof of stake is not like interest at all.  It's a compensation for the effort of the miners to keep their wallets open which expands and strengthens the network.

You are not lending money to anyone when you generate a PoS block.

Otherwise agree.  PLDEx3yKPKgwWyiGWwpv9PNWNYorUcTskE  thanks!

[PeercoinEnthusiast]

Sending coins right now.

- If you received your coins, please let us know
- If you typed up an opinion and didn't receive coins, please let us know
- If you just said agreed or disagreed, please re-read my original post

SENT

1. Viscera
2. belltown
3. wachtwoord
4. hellscabane
5. pmconrad
6. Digicoiner
7. cc5alive
8. KrLos
9. flound1129
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.

[artiface]

I agree and disagree. It's not black and white really. In a PoS system it is not really "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer" or "the rich get richer and the poor get richer".

When new coins are generated by PoS the money supply is increased so the value of each coin (in theory land) goes down proportionally.  If everyone lets their coins earn PoS at the same rate the rich and poor stay the same amount of rich or poor. If you don't let your coins generate PoS then you get poorer because you will very slowly have less percentage of the coin. If you are too poor to allow your coins to generate PoS because you need to spend them, while a rich person has enough to hoard away, well then yes the rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer, so in some cases the criticism is true, but not always.

PJyCZXM3vakfwVpEtnZX27X61uESC5kDir

[cc5alive]

@PeercoinEnthusiast

I received my PPC
Thank you.

[irritant]

Hey, you guys rebranded the name!

I disagree with removing PoS because it is the main differentiators of PPC.

I disagree with the statement because using PoS is open to all. Everyone can do it and no-one is excluded.

PLRxLq3tjWpQHmF38iRAcy3UctrHC3TksN

maybe i didnt read carefully, but where does it say something about removing PoS?

[wigglyuk]

I'm not sure how Proof-of-stake works but here is what I can add if it hasnt be added:

I agree with Sunny but I think there needs to be a reassessment of the phrase "same rate" and "Proportional". Sure they have the same figure of interest but the richer get richer faster than the poor get richer, although they will always be the same ratio between their incomes and therefore proportional, the amount of total income gained between the rich and poor is not proportional.

I am fine with this solution, but I do think there should be another coin to counteract this coin.
A coin where the rate of interest is significantly less for the rich as it is for the poor. Such that the poor have a larger rate of interest than the rich but as the poor become rich the rate is decreased. Thereby to bridge the gap and make the total income gained proportional rather than the rate of interest.

PUd4CSdnrFrNgNa3sMgSSNfHSaynYFvvhJ
thanks for the unique giveaway.

EDIT: Received 1PPC

[Sentinelrv]

I agree and disagree. It's not black and white really. In a PoS system it is not really "the rich get richer and the poor get poorer" or "the rich get richer and the poor get richer".

When new coins are generated by PoS the money supply is increased so the value of each coin (in theory land) goes down proportionally.  If everyone lets their coins earn PoS at the same rate the rich and poor stay the same amount of rich or poor. If you don't let your coins generate PoS then you get poorer because you will very slowly have less percentage of the coin. If you are too poor to allow your coins to generate PoS because you need to spend them, while a rich person has enough to hoard away, well then yes the rich will get richer and the poor will get poorer, so in some cases the criticism is true, but not always.

I'm not an expert by any means, but I think I agree with you. I believe what you're saying is that both the rich and the poor that are holding their ppc and generating stake with it will become richer. At the same time, both the rich and the poor that are transacting with their ppc and NOT generating stake are becoming poorer. They're becoming poorer because they're not using their ppc to generate stake and are losing value through the 1% inflation.
 
So to sum it up, whether you're rich or poor, if you generate stake you will become richer. At the same time, whether you're rich or poor, if you don't generate stake you will very slowly lose value through 1% inflation and become poorer.
 
And if this is correct, I don't see any problem with it. As Sunny said in the last sentence of his response...
 
"Meanwhile, those who transact in the network with high velocity pay the security cost via low inflation." - Sunny King
 
...The people who are not generating stake and transacting with their money pay this fee to those who are generating stake because they're providing the service of securing the network. It's only fair that those who are guaranteeing security get paid by those taking advantage of their service.

[belltown]

A coin where the rate of interest is significantly less for the rich as it is for the poor. Such that the poor have a larger rate of interest than the rich but as the poor become rich the rate is decreased. Thereby to bridge the gap and make the total income gained proportional rather than the rate of interest.

The rich are not just rich, but they are usually SMART. So if I have a lot of coins and you would want to penalize my interest because now I'm considered "rich" then I will just create hundreds of small wallets so I can receive full interest on my money, same as "poor" do. So rich will end up receicing the same interest as poor anyway despite the attempt to regulate PoS interest.

[wigglyuk]

A coin where the rate of interest is significantly less for the rich as it is for the poor. Such that the poor have a larger rate of interest than the rich but as the poor become rich the rate is decreased. Thereby to bridge the gap and make the total income gained proportional rather than the rate of interest.

The rich are not just rich, but they are usually SMART. So if I have a lot of coins and you would want to penalize my interest because now I'm considered "rich" then I will just create hundreds of small wallets so I can receive full interest on my money, same as "poor" do. So rich will end up receicing the same interest as poor anyway despite the attempt to regulate PoS interest.

Interesting, I didn't think of that. I'm not saying a new coin of this type would work, but it would be an interesting experiment.
In that case I would apply the Tor bitcoin network model, in which case you can only make a new wallet every X many hours and only Y many wallets can be added to the network every block (X and Y would not be constant). This would limit the attempt to feed off the poor's interest. But it would still be a valid strategy to create every possible wallet you could to receive the maximum interest thereby early adopters would have the largest maximum. Regulating the PoS interest would be hard, but I don't think it would be impossible.

[Snail21]

Agree. Holding the coins therefore providing defense against 51% attacks is a service for the network. People who holding coins instead of selling for BTC basically investing into the network. Bigger investment certainly means bigger return.

PT6fFzE265RbpszmxDVekqVgDd82AfUVCr

[belltown]

Interesting, I didn't think of that ... Regulating the PoS interest would be hard, but I don't think it would be impossible.

Let us create a big government and many regulations so we help the poor... Hmm, that didn't work. So what's the solution? Correct! We need more and better regulations, we need bigger and better government.

BTW. Thanks for the coin! I did receive it.

[KrLos]

Recieved! thanks a lot

[Lederstrumpf]

Agree with Sunny, primarily because this accusation is not PoS specific. It can in the very same way be argued that PoW mining favours those that are able to afford better mining rigs because their share of new coins generated is greater. Moreover, as with PoS, this income is proportional to the actual investment the party has made into the currency, whether this is buying coins or running hardware.

I guess it could be argued that PoW has more variables that are related to the actual time investment of the party - i.e. mining rigs have to be fine tuned to mine at the greatest hash rate, cards must be undervolted to save on electricity bills, etc., all of which gives the poorer man a bit of headroom to outsmart his richer neighbour and improve his overall position. But yet again, the greater the mining rig involved, the greater the payoff of the extra time investment, so you run into the same issue that PoS is accused of.

PVnznVteB312yvWWDcxZocWRzR3pM5PLQT
Thanks, this is a welcome method of encouraging discussion!