One way is to have a central, trusted authority handing out the money. Another way that would have never crossed my mind is the bitcoin idea (CPU power, now GPU power). This is more "fair" than anything I would have come up with, this is the fascinating side.
Also obviously in contrast to most people here, I still believe the initial bitcoin distribution is nevertheless pretty unfair. It is ok for early adopters to have some small advantage, but if the whole thing works out, they will probably be millionairs soon. The question is however whether the system is fair enough to succeed anyway.
True, if they hold off, shit, maybe they could be billionaires down the road. Course, if they did, that would probably drag a number of even later adopters into comfortable lives. Is that entirely "fair", well... if it was a garaunteed payout, I might say so. However, if that happens, well luck is going to play a part, can't blame people for having their long shot plan work out.
I have plenty of problem with people who just collect wealth to themselves even if it is detrimental to others. High level CEO contracts that pay out huge bonuses even for short term gains... things that create perverse incentives. However... making a long shot bet and having it pay off?
I would say that systemic inequities that continue into the future and magnify themselves are huge problems, problems that we need to address. However a one time inequity that is hard to avoid? Whats the worst that can come of a few new rich people?... it is clearly a better system than well....anything that has come before in currency. Small price for the world to pay considering that the USD is currently controlled by a cabal who can decide to just make more and lend it out to banks for free.
Current money is not at all distributed "fairly", and it might well be that bitcoin commerce just keeps growing despite of the unfair initial distribution. Still, it will be difficult to explain to newcomers. The totally unfair distribution of current money is well settled in the heads, and a new currency favouring nerdiness instead of provenance has to be legitimated.
I think you give people either too little or too much credit. We are quite familiar with unfair distribution of currency. Whether it is old favorites like gold or diamonds mined from the ground by slaves, up to modern day monies.
Those that do really care about that, well, they either will give it credit as being the fairest every created, or else they aren't going to be happy with it, and will want to do something else anyway. More power to them. Can't please everyone.
Do you have any evidence that most people will be more motivated by philosophical issues then by the ease of entry into getting and using a currency than anything else to make their decision as to what to use?
Thus, I believe the bitcoin system is unfair, but maybe not more than other currencies.
I believe there might be better solutions using a "web of trust" and a Ripple-like approach (as suggested by jav), but I have no clear idea yet. As soon as I have a clear idea, I will obviously start my own monetary system
Case in point. Good luck, shit, I may even use it, there are worst things than having... gasp... choice :0
If you are thinking ripple, then why not... use ripple? Whats the issue with it that you want to solve? I mean, like I said, I approve of choice... but... unless you have something new to add, why reinvent the wheel?
What actually made me turn off the expensive GPU I just purchased solely to mine bitcoins after only 100 BTC is the ecological aspect. It is totally against my ideal to blow CO2 into the atmosphere like a madman only to solve equations that actually nobody needs to be solved. As far as I understand, the stability and security of the system relies on an ever increasing amount of computing power spent.
Not sure if I will ever turn it on again ...
Interested in selling the card? PM me if you are, I might be very interested. Course, if you really want to save CO2, you should probably take a hammer to it to prevent anyone from ever using it to spit out CO2 indirectly again.
This is true, but, so far, I think CO2 contribution from bitcoin is probably not terribly significant. Also, while we are talking about ever-increasing computing power, the energy cost per cycle actually is dropping at the same time. That's why I run VMs for most things.
