[SURVEY] Kryptodollar

[bugm]

Hi everybody,

In a rapidly changing world, we strongly believe that more and more governments will consider to adopt some kind of crypto-currency. Most likely they will create one of their own and that doesn't necessarily have to be a bad thing. Even when sometimes we like to look down on our governments, they also do a lot of good. But let's not go into that. In this topic we would like to concentrate on how a government issued crypto-currency could support it's fiat currency! And we would like to hear your thoughts about this!

As a hypothetical example, let's consider the Kryptodollar.

The idea of a US government issued crypto-currency doesn't sound crazy at all. Most likely it's being developed already. But suppose all of us would get a chance to contribute to its development, what would we add? Which features would we like it to have? What could turn it into the most democratic crypto-currency ever created? How could it support the US Dollar, and vice versa?

So let's brainstorm a bit on this subject and see what we come up with? :-)


PS: This survey is supported by Karen Hudes (http://www.kahudes.net), former senior executive at the World Bank.

Join BUG'M, our Bitcoin User Group in Magdeburg, Germany here: 
http://www.meetup.com/BUGM-Bitcoin-User-Group-Magdeburg

[Lauda]

The point of crypto currency is decentralization.
If you add the government into the equation, you lose the essence of crypto currency. It will be centralized and controlled again.

[bugm]

The point of crypto currency is decentralization.
If you add the government into the equation, you lose the essence of crypto currency. It will be centralized and controlled again.

If you look at it from another point of view, it shouldn't have to be like that, not necessarily.

Try to think about a crypto-currency that is interesting enough for both government AND the people.

Something like that could go far, given the proper intentions of both parties.

[digitalindustry]

What survey ?  Is this the survey ?


Karen Hudes does great work , i love that she has a net net positive outlook , there is a lot of doom {not the currency} in economics these days as the fiat system collapses under the weight of its own debt issuance corruption.

It takes a more enlightened individual to see though to the obvious flaws of some of these end of the times scenarios.

Having said that its likely in one way or another a lot of people are going to die.

as a follower of Karen's ideas ; and a believer in the positive

I have a few questions;

1. Who will be the issuing Authority?

2. I assume the design will be an " to economy" inflation design , say for example the exists enough for the needs, if not would it be deflationary as is BTC.

3. If the issuing authority is actually " the Government" and the topic writer isnt just confused, how to deal with the transference of political power ?

3a. "The government" couldn't control and still can not control the largest financial institutions,  how can it issue a Cryptocurrency?

4. How would emission be handled , if the issuance is done centrally ASICs would supposedly secure the network, it will be a 100% pre mined with a set inflation target ?


**
In before Anonymint and Vlad : D

[digitalindustry]

The point of crypto currency is decentralization.
If you add the government into the equation, you lose the essence of crypto currency. It will be centralized and controlled again.

If you look at it from another point of view, it shouldn't have to be like that, not necessarily.

Try to think about a crypto-currency that is interesting enough for both government AND the people.

Something like that could go far, given the proper intentions of both parties.

I think it will run into something I like to call ,

"The law of multidimentional competitive information continuance. "

Its kind of a slippery slope, it takes in to account political aspects , but vastly limits some actions, having said that ive been wrong in the past on this stuff .

How do we say " adversity is the mother of invention" .

[Spayse]

i thiu ght the ideA was to put currency creation in the hands of the people

BOO!

[Lauda]

The point of crypto currency is decentralization.
If you add the government into the equation, you lose the essence of crypto currency. It will be centralized and controlled again.

If you look at it from another point of view, it shouldn't have to be like that, not necessarily.

Try to think about a crypto-currency that is interesting enough for both government AND the people.

Something like that could go far, given the proper intentions of both parties.

Whatever is in the interest of the government is not really in the interest of the people.
They don't really care about us (most of them at least).

[digitalindustry]

Government is not the problem. 

[Lauda]

Government is not the problem. 

So what is?

[digitalindustry]

Government is not the problem. 

So what is?

Lets invite Karen here to explain your question , I have bad general english skills and I dont feel I'll get the point across. 

Is Karen in the house ?

[Lauda]

Government is not the problem. 

So what is?

Lets invite Karen here to explain your question , I have bad general english skills and I dont feel I'll get the point across. 

Is Karen in the house ?

Who is Karen?

[bugm]

What survey ?  Is this the survey ?

Yes, this is the survey. Or maybe let's call it an open discussion :-)

1. Who will be the issuing Authority?

2. I assume the design will be an " to economy" inflation design , say for example the exists enough for the needs, if not would it be deflationary as is BTC.

3. If the issuing authority is actually " the Government" and the topic writer isnt just confused, how to deal with the transference of political power ?

We will pass these questions to Karen.

3a. "The government" couldn't control and still can not control the largest financial institutions, how can it issue a Cryptocurrency?

As we're talking about a crypto-currency, I guess we should define what "control" really means in this case.

It would have to be very different from the (so called) control that governments currently have over fiat currencies,
especially since we cannot (and shouldn't) change the original nature and philosophies behind crypto-currencies.

So perhaps the question is: how much influence on a crypto-currency would you accept from a government?

4. How would emission be handled , if the issuance is done centrally ASICs would supposedly secure the network, it will be a 100% pre mined with a set inflation target ?

Can we imagine a solution where a government would accept not to own all the coins?
If the crypto-currency is democratic, they should allow for decentralized mining, but would this be an option?
I will add this to the list of questions for Karen, as she is probably more suited to answer this.

As for dedicated hardware like ASIC's, perhaps a more affordable mining solution for a broader audience would be better?
That brings us to the encryption algorithm. Maybe scrypt is more democratic than SHA256? Or maybe there is another option?

--
Join BUG'M, our Bitcoin User Group in Magdeburg, Germany here: 
http://www.meetup.com/BUGM-Bitcoin-User-Group-Magdeburg

[bugm]

i thiu ght the ideA was to put currency creation in the hands of the people

We believe there is a promising future for a lot of different crypto-currencies, issued by both the people and the governments. The question here is: how can we make a government issued crypto-currency democratic, or in other words accepted by (the majority of) the people?

[bugm]

Whatever is in the interest of the government is not really in the interest of the people.
They don't really care about us (most of them at least).

Sometimes we all feel like this, but in this topic of discussion we would like to find out
what "we" (the people) would accept as a government issued crypto-currency.

Suppose we would have a say in how such a crypto-currency was
built, which features would we like or need it to have?

[bugm]

Is Karen in the house?

We will ask for her feedback about the questions that we already have.

[bugm]

Who is Karen?

Karen Hudes (http://www.kahudes.net), former senior executive at the World Bank.

[digitalindustry]

As we're talking about a crypto-currency, I guess we should define what "control" really means in this case.

It would have to be very different from the (so called) control that governments currently have over fiat currencies,
especially since we cannot (and shouldn't) change the original nature and philosophies behind crypto-currencies.

So perhaps the question is: how much influence on a crypto-currency would you accept from a government?

Ok thanks for that clarification ,  but with all due respect unless guidlines are put in place really a "cryptocurrency" could literally be anything , it could be existing without a blockchain , it could be Corporation issued as is the USD it could be "Government issued" .

obviously perhaps that is your intention to discover , I really hope it goes back to some sort of a Kernal of a proposal and i will be uber interested to see the results / progress .

Here is my general advice

I think that you will find that tolerance is fairly high .

 if a government issued cryptocurrency was instituted weather it be a stop gap emergency instrument that then developed into an offical currency or,  a preemptive issuance and some sort of integration.

 if the currency is indeed equitible and serves the purposes of SME, ( the drivers of velocity in relation to " price" and " standard of living " ) .

And if the issuance is obviously pegged back to the principals of a "PoW" and  protected against fraud " unlike fiat systems which are based on fraud" .

People will not generally understand of course unless they educate themselves , but they will be tolerant.

Wouldnt it be a nice " conspiracy" if the actual rational actors inside some of our government institutions were thinking ahead and thinking about national security .

Wouldnt it be nice if that resulted (in whatever way ) into a more equitible general system, which accoring to my calculations can only happen in the current information environment .

Then as per the " principal of multidimensional information continuance" the system must act inside the new information environment upon the new set of principals , this accoring to the principal then changes the environment and so on.

So indeed a system such as this could have larger positive effect than realized , and will be hard to game .

Follow up question id like forwarded :



What code , and will it be open source ?

^^^

We all know "governments" sensitivity around " privacy" and " domain" but I have to further advise cryptocurrency exists in a peer driven environment,  while  it is possible that a  Gov issued crypto could survive close sourced , it will be at a great disadvantage , possibly a grievously disabling one.

Obviously cryptocurrency exists due to the need for it , some of this is mistrust and loss of confidence in fiat in general ( well founded) close source may have little if any better confidence.  

[digitalindustry]

Who is Karen?

Karen Hudes (http://www.kahudes.net), former senior executive at the World Bank.

In before Anonymint and Vlad

: D

Lol

[Snail21]

I think the current fixed coin creation method wouldn't be flexible enough for a government. They would need something demand based coin creation with unlimited coins.

Possibility for double spending and creating "superblocks" on the fly if needed would be also essential .

[Lauda]

Who is Karen?

Karen Hudes (http://www.kahudes.net), former senior executive at the World Bank.

In before Anonymint and Vlad

: D

Lol

That puts here in a perfect position.