gollum (OP)
Sr. Member
![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif) ![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif) ![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif)
Offline
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
In Hashrate We Trust!
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
February 04, 2014, 12:01:30 PM |
|
Although I love bitcoin and it was revolutionary in 2009, it is far from an ideal coin the more you analyze it. The ideal coin should: -not waste energy and computing power on mining -derive it's value from real assets instead of being a digital fiat currency -promote commerce instead of speculation and hoarding -be 100% anonymous instead of helping big brother -be scalable instead of having a limit of transactions per second This is a comparison between bitcoin and an ideal coin: \ | BitCoin | Ideal Coin | Type of coin | Fiat, zero intrinsic value | Contract, Each coin is a unique contract where the issuer promises to hold a certain amount of an asset for each coin issued, for example 1 oz gold | Coin issuance | Mining needed, Proof of Work | No mining needed, Proof of Stake used | Supply of coins | 21 millions | Unlimited | Rewards | Early adaptors are rewarded | Nobody is rewarded since coins are free | Promotes | Promotes hoarding and speculation because of a limited supply | Promots usage in commerce | Volatility in price | High volatility in price of coin vs dollar | No volatility, since each coin is connected to a real asset | Anonymity | Users can be tracked, like bank transactions | No possibility of tracking, like dollar bills | Scalability | Growing blockchain size, max transactions per second is limited | Distributed blockchain, no limit on transactions per second | Decentralized | Is becoming less decentralized because of ASIC mining and a huge blockchain | No need to download 100% of blockchain, and no mining needed keeps the network decentralized |
|
|
|
|
benjamindees
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
February 04, 2014, 12:25:09 PM |
|
Contract, Each coin is a unique contract where the issuer promises to hold a certain amount of an asset for each coin issued, for example 1 oz gold Lol, no. Use Ripple if you want counter-party risk. Unlimited Also lol.
|
Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics
|
|
|
Mr. Socko
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
February 04, 2014, 12:41:15 PM |
|
Then you have to have it centralized and trust the person holding the gold. Yes it could work, if a trusted source like Kitco decided to do it and acted as their own exchange between gold, US Dollars, and shares of their crypto currency, but like I mentioned in the other thread you'd have to trust Kitco to not go under (they probably wouldn't and might even make money from a service like this) .. I would trust them actually, to be honest... but I wouldn't trust very many to pull something like this off.
Also like mentioned in the other thread you have to worry about either kitco or you having to constantly track tax gains or losses for every purchase potentially, something I will NEVER do.. I'll pay the sales tax but beyond that I'm not recording anything.
|
|
|
|
gollum (OP)
Sr. Member
![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif) ![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif) ![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif)
Offline
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
In Hashrate We Trust!
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
February 04, 2014, 12:53:48 PM |
|
Contract, Each coin is a unique contract where the issuer promises to hold a certain amount of an asset for each coin issued, for example 1 oz gold Lol, no. Use Ripple if you want counter-party risk. Unlimited Also lol. Life is full of counter-party risks, but we learn which counter parties to trust and trade with. Assume a respectable mint like Perth Mint issues contracts of 1 oz gold, there is no risk they scam you or go bankrupt. They are already selling gold certificates, and could issue their certificate on a crypto currency instead of paper. Unlimited supply -> Coin price will be at zero -> Coin will be used as a certificate instead of a ponzi scheme What Im suggesting is a decentralized crypto that will store certificates from any issuer. The market price of each certificate will be the function of the underlying asset and the trustworthyness of the issuer.
|
|
|
|
benjamindees
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1330
Merit: 1000
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
February 04, 2014, 01:06:21 PM |
|
The market price of each certificate will be the function of the underlying asset and the trustworthyness of the issuer.
So, all the downsides of both currency and barter, and the upsides of neither. Like I said, look into Ripple.
|
Civil Liberty Through Complex Mathematics
|
|
|
gollum (OP)
Sr. Member
![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif) ![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif) ![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif)
Offline
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
In Hashrate We Trust!
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
February 04, 2014, 01:17:30 PM |
|
The market price of each certificate will be the function of the underlying asset and the trustworthyness of the issuer.
So, all the downsides of both currency and barter, and the upsides of neither. Like I said, look into Ripple. Yes why not cap the limit at 21 million, pretend we got intrinsic value and reward early adaptors for selling to greater fools in the ponzi scheme. After all it's safer to pay 1000$ for 1/21 millionth of a ponzi, then to pay 0$ for a blank sheet of paper that could be used to sign a contract for gold, stocks or real estate.
|
|
|
|
Mr. Socko
Newbie
Offline
Activity: 42
Merit: 0
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
February 04, 2014, 01:20:53 PM |
|
The market price of each certificate will be the function of the underlying asset and the trustworthyness of the issuer.
So, all the downsides of both currency and barter, and the upsides of neither. Like I said, look into Ripple. Yes why not cap the limit at 21 million, pretend we got intrinsic value and reward early adaptors for selling to greater fools in the ponzi scheme. After all it's safer to pay 1000$ for 1/21 millionth of a ponzi, then to pay 0$ for a blank sheet of paper that could be used to sign a contract for gold, stocks or real estate. haha well played. In truth money's value comes from the goods and services it purchases and the faith people have in it. Anything can 'be' money. I could see bitcoin as a viable place to store money in the event there is a major economic disaster, but it needs support from services that can convert between it and other currencies, online marketplaces that will continue to accept it, and I suppose at the very least the government to look the other way, which I suspect they will not do forever. If they said that no company could accept bitcoin... and tigerdirect and overstock.com and every other business vanished.... that could be a problem... that's why this is still the 'wild west'
|
|
|
|
FandangledGizmo
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1138
Merit: 1001
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
February 04, 2014, 03:59:31 PM |
|
I agree that POS is an advancement over POW but that might not be enough to unseat Bitcoin. As for the rest, your post is hysterical! No-one on a crypto-currency forum will fall for an unlimited coin that has centralised counter-party risk, tell your banker friends to try again. The hoarding argument is false. The US grew rapidly into the largest creditor nation in the world in the 1800's using a slightly deflationary currency. What cost $100 in 1800 would cost $48.94 in 1900. Also, if you were to buy exactly the same products in 1900 and 1800, they would cost you $100 and $204.33 respectively. http://www.westegg.com/inflation/infl.cgiOf course using an inflationary currency for the last 100 years has left them in pretty much the opposite predicament today. (Well even worse actually the $ has lost 96%+ of it's value and it's the biggest debtor nation.) As for being backed by something physical, there's a market for that, like e-gold. But the millennial (Internet) generation has already shown it generally prefers something decentralised that exists in the digital world with less counter-party risks whose existence is verified/validated by the laws of mathematics. But good luck, so far every iteration of a very inflationary crypto has struggled/failed.
|
|
|
|
odolvlobo
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 4424
Merit: 3325
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
February 04, 2014, 04:36:20 PM |
|
PoS rewards early adopters because you have to have coins to gain coins and the early adopters have all the coins.
|
Join an anti-signature campaign: Click ignore on the members of signature campaigns. PGP Fingerprint: 6B6BC26599EC24EF7E29A405EAF050539D0B2925 Signing address: 13GAVJo8YaAuenj6keiEykwxWUZ7jMoSLt
|
|
|
Rannasha
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
February 04, 2014, 04:45:53 PM |
|
Contract, Each coin is a unique contract where the issuer promises to hold a certain amount of an asset for each coin issued, for example 1 oz gold The dollar was a contract where the issuer promised to hold a certain amount of an asset for each bill issued at some point. And look at it now. A currency is not a commodity and therefore doesn't need intrinsic value in the form of a backing asset.
|
|
|
|
FandangledGizmo
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1138
Merit: 1001
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
February 04, 2014, 05:44:10 PM |
|
PoS rewards early adopters because you have to have coins to gain coins and the early adopters have all the coins.
True but for the 1st 2 years of Bitcoin, Satoshi controlled obscene amount of total BTC. Even NXT with only +-70 initial adopters was better distributed. As for owners of coins earning coins, it's better than miners who can afford most expensive rigs earning coins. Last I read, GHash.IO which has biggest Bitcoin hashing pool is owned by interests in the city of London. So with Bitcoin for example, you're already paying $20-40 per year for every $1000 of Bitcoin you own to the City of London based on GHash.IO hashing power. I think the fees being paid back to the actual owners of the coins is a better model.
|
|
|
|
BlockChainLottery
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
February 04, 2014, 07:34:57 PM |
|
Contract, Each coin is a unique contract where the issuer promises to hold a certain amount of an asset for each coin issued, for example 1 oz gold The dollar was a contract where the issuer promised to hold a certain amount of an asset for each bill issued at some point. And look at it now. A currency is not a commodity and therefore doesn't need intrinsic value in the form of a backing asset. Agreed. - On top of that, a backing asset can become more available or scarcer. That in turn influences the value of the coin.
- Every coin in circulation has an asset sitting somewhere doing nothing.
- If for example gold is the most used asset, not everybody finds it equally valuable. Hungry people can't eat it.
- The coins would be a promise to pay the asset. So not the assets make the system work, but the reliability of promises to pay the asset. In turn not assets or needed to have a working currency.
- Some people could issue contract or promises resembling too much value in comparison to the assets backing it up. After all, if people used this system they probably would never claim the backing assets, and thus it can be fiddled with.
|
|
|
|
porcupine87
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
February 04, 2014, 07:47:42 PM |
|
Type of coin | Fiat, zero intrinsic value | Contract, Each coin is a unique contract where the issuer promises to hold a certain amount of an asset for each coin issued, for example 1 oz gold |
This would be a nice other altcoin and users could decide. But how do you want to do that for the same low costs? Explain the mechanism ![Wink](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/wink.gif) For sure the coins would be not unlimited but limited by the real real ressources. My ideal coin would have a proof of work with real life usage. Like Curecoin, but better ![Wink](https://bitcointalk.org/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
|
"Morality, it could be argued, represents the way that people would like the world to work - whereas economics represents how it actually does work." Freakonomics
|
|
|
Fizzgig
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
February 04, 2014, 08:32:25 PM |
|
Money is an information system, if you back it by something physical you are not achieving the ideal.
|
Best Bitcoin supported browser game: Minethings: Dig, Trade, and Fight your way to influence!
|
|
|
porcupine87
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
February 04, 2014, 09:01:03 PM |
|
Money is an information system, if you back it by something physical you are not achieving the ideal.
why? Every good could be theoretical money. Medium of exchange, value storage and value measurement. Some goods just qualify more for money than others (gold vs. iron or horses)
|
"Morality, it could be argued, represents the way that people would like the world to work - whereas economics represents how it actually does work." Freakonomics
|
|
|
techstorm2
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
February 04, 2014, 09:17:38 PM |
|
Although I love bitcoin and it was revolutionary in 2009, it is far from an ideal coin the more you analyze it. The ideal coin should: -not waste energy and computing power on mining -derive it's value from real assets instead of being a digital fiat currency -promote commerce instead of speculation and hoarding -be 100% anonymous instead of helping big brother -be scalable instead of having a limit of transactions per second This is a comparison between bitcoin and an ideal coin: \ | BitCoin | Ideal Coin | Type of coin | Fiat, zero intrinsic value | Contract, Each coin is a unique contract where the issuer promises to hold a certain amount of an asset for each coin issued, for example 1 oz gold | Coin issuance | Mining needed, Proof of Work | No mining needed, Proof of Stake used | Supply of coins | 21 millions | Unlimited | Rewards | Early adaptors are rewarded | Nobody is rewarded since coins are free | Promotes | Promotes hoarding and speculation because of a limited supply | Promots usage in commerce | Volatility in price | High volatility in price of coin vs dollar | No volatility, since each coin is connected to a real asset | Anonymity | Users can be tracked, like bank transactions | No possibility of tracking, like dollar bills | Scalability | Growing blockchain size, max transactions per second is limited | Distributed blockchain, no limit on transactions per second | Decentralized | Is becoming less decentralized because of ASIC mining and a huge blockchain | No need to download 100% of blockchain, and no mining needed keeps the network decentralized |
Ideal coin looks like US dollar pre 1971!
|
Dime 7Q3cZtyJemmE8pJsrYgX24mHnkqZX6M6hP BTC 18vbvovBeM5ZTZqR5ZWAy75EXE7qTNipuo Mooncoin 2QgyivUMa7Zun6oPdxeE1yry1aNp5hqrDb LTC Lg3UYGCAe3Tb146PiMqeGNLR7bnjdM447d Doge DPd1XejW8TabJu5gfjyKnuQYQ9Vzw1anXN
|
|
|
Peter R
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1162
Merit: 1007
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
February 04, 2014, 09:39:22 PM |
|
-derive it's value from real assets instead of being a digital fiat currency
What does it mean for something to be real? For something to be physical? I would argue that the DNA that provides the blueprint to our bodies is both real and physical--each cell in our body contains a redundant copy of this information. What's important about this DNA is the information that it encodes. And the distributed nature of this information is what gives life its robustness. The bitcoin network is analogous to the network of cells in our body. As each cell carries a copy of our DNA, each bitcoin node stores and builds upon the blockchain. Instead of genetic information encoded with amino acids, the blockchain encodes ledger entries using electric charge. At the physical level then, bitcoins are just as real as a gene sequence in our DNA. Each transaction is accepted by the cells, and through an innovative process known as mining, they agree to add another amino-acid sequence to the blockchain. Based on this analogy, I would argue that bitcoins are more robust than conventional physical objects like a gold coin, and definitely more robust than any living organism. The robustness is more akin to the robustness of an entire species of animals, for example, ants. You can try and try, but it's pretty difficult to eliminate all the ants in this world! Or, looking at it from a different angle, think about that embarrassing picture of a friend that got posted to Facebook and copied/emailed all over the place? Now even Google finds the darn thing! Bitcoins stored in the blockchain are like this, but even more so. I would argue that the blockchain is the most highly-secured piece of information mankind has ever created. In conclusion, bitcoins are very real.
|
|
|
|
jongameson
Member
![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif)
Offline
Activity: 84
Merit: 10
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
February 04, 2014, 09:42:36 PM |
|
We already HAVE ideal coin. it's called US Dollar
the problem being, we have to trust the supplier of the note (the US Government) that it's worth something
what happens when China takes over the world. then what
|
|
|
|
Holliday
Legendary
Offline
Activity: 1120
Merit: 1012
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
February 04, 2014, 10:25:10 PM |
|
OP's idea of "ideal" and my idea of "ideal" are worlds apart.
That said, I fully support alt-coins competing with Bitcoin on the open market. Bring it!
|
If you aren't the sole controller of your private keys, you don't have any bitcoins.
|
|
|
gollum (OP)
Sr. Member
![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif) ![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif) ![*](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/star.gif)
Offline
Activity: 434
Merit: 250
In Hashrate We Trust!
|
![](https://bitcointalk.org/Themes/custom1/images/post/xx.gif) |
February 05, 2014, 12:42:18 AM Last edit: February 05, 2014, 12:52:44 AM by gollum |
|
OP's idea of "ideal" and my idea of "ideal" are worlds apart.
That said, I fully support alt-coins competing with Bitcoin on the open market. Bring it!
Yes, thats why we got 100 different alt-coins, people have different opinions and goals with crypto currencies. Today billions of dollars are invested in Gold ETF's on the stock exchange, some of that money would instead be invested in a gold backed crypto currency if such coin existed, a coin backed by Kitco or Perth Mint. Trillions of dollars are invested in bonds, some issuers could sell coins based on government bonds and corporate bonds. I know this sounds like going against Satoshi's original idea (a crypto currency living on it's own without a mint), but ironically I think a mint-based crypto will be the best competitor to fiat currencies. Abstract. A purely peer-to-peer version of electronic cash would allow online payments to be sent directly from one party to another without going through a financial institution. Digital signatures provide part of the solution, but the main benefits are lost if a trusted third party is still required to prevent double-spending. We propose a solution to the double-spending problem using a peer-to-peer network. /Satoshi https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf"ideal" coin: peer-to-peer just like bitcoin but we let the mint, a trusted third party, decide the intrinsic value of each issued coin.
|
|
|
|
|