Bitcoin Forum
January 19, 2019, 09:18:58 AM *
News: Latest Bitcoin Core release: 0.17.1 [Torrent]
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register More  
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5]  All
  Print  
Author Topic: Appeal to the community for the development of MC2 and related technologies  (Read 5643 times)
Korean
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 138
Merit: 100


View Profile
February 23, 2014, 06:56:00 PM
 #81

it took George Eastman, the inventor of Kodak film, four years to come up with a name for his product. His mother helped him, and had a few rules for what he wanted: something short, something impossible to mispronounce, something unique, and something that included his favorite letter, K.

it's hard but it really pays off. worth the time investment
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction. Advertise here.
1547889538
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1547889538

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1547889538
Reply with quote  #2

1547889538
Report to moderator
1547889538
Hero Member
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1547889538

View Profile Personal Message (Offline)

Ignore
1547889538
Reply with quote  #2

1547889538
Report to moderator
romerun
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1078
Merit: 1001


Bitcoin is new, makes sense to hodl.


View Profile
February 24, 2014, 10:43:20 AM
 #82

Looks like peershare has a demand of mini-blockchain as well. http://www.peercointalk.org/index.php?topic=2250.msg19235#msg19235
cubicdissection
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 233
Merit: 10


View Profile WWW
February 25, 2014, 03:44:06 PM
 #83

I was reading through the newsletters and have a question about funding.  

In an earlier letter you note that "Individuals themselves will be capped to contributions of $5,000".  Ok, fair enough, and not a bad idea to prevent accusations that the initial distro is too concentrated aka NXT.

Then later I came across this "Want to contribute, but don't want to put in a full $5,000?  We will be making instructions within the next few newsletters about how you can post on the Group Buys section of the forum and take users public keys in exchange for smaller amounts of BTC yourself, which you can then pool and use to pay one of the developers."

So we went from a max individual contribution of $5000 to a corresponding minimum contribution of $5000 with no option in between but some kind of dodgy pool scenario where who knows what can happen.

Do I have $5000 to invest? Yes.  Do I have $5000 to invest in MC2? No...because there are other crypto options and I diversify my holdings among them.  As do the majority of investors I imagine.

While we all believe in you, do understand that investing/donating in MC2 is highly speculative.  Requiring a $5000 commitment for direct investment means you are cutting out the average Joe like myself.  It seems arbitrary and exclusionary.  It's not that much more difficult to allow people to directly invest whatever they feel comfortable up to your maximum limit. I hope you will reconsider.
Lawyer
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 37
Merit: 0


View Profile
February 25, 2014, 06:46:45 PM
 #84

No, I do not think there is a minimum contribution, I saw the same newsletter myself. I'll double check in a second.

I'm pretty sure he meant that you guys could pool your contributions together if you wanted to reach the $5k cap. But as far as I know, there is no minimum contribution. You can donate as much as you like, but $5k per person is max. The ultimate logic and goal is to get this coin as fairly distributed as possible.

Taco, could you please clarify the message when you get a chance?
Korean
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 138
Merit: 100


View Profile
February 25, 2014, 08:45:32 PM
 #85

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=486514.0
tacotime
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484
Merit: 1000



View Profile
February 25, 2014, 08:50:49 PM
 #86

Taco, could you please clarify the message when you get a chance?

In a bit, I'm really sick with a flu/cold right now.  Hopefully another newsletter will be issued within the week to clarify things with regards to this.

Code:
XMR: 44GBHzv6ZyQdJkjqZje6KLZ3xSyN1hBSFAnLP6EAqJtCRVzMzZmeXTC2AHKDS9aEDTRKmo6a6o9r9j86pYfhCWDkKjbtcns
cubicdissection
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 233
Merit: 10


View Profile WWW
February 26, 2014, 05:34:29 AM
 #87

In a bit, I'm really sick with a flu/cold right now. 

Feel better dude...
Luckybit
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714
Merit: 500



View Profile
February 26, 2014, 10:45:34 PM
Last edit: February 26, 2014, 11:13:43 PM by Luckybit
 #88

Kinda-sorta.  I would argue inflation basically helps anyone who has money invested in things which do not consistently devalue (equity, precious metal) while destroying the wealth of those who do not.  But there exists a host of problems for any deflationary currency that Bitcoin doesn't solve as well, and doesn't even attempt to solve.

Ultimately this all depends on how attractive you want to make the coin to investors and whether you want it to function better as a store of value or as a transaction currency. I would argue that the store of value mechanism is more important because if you have a good store of value people can easily create their own personal currencies on top of that.

The coins could in essence double as shares and those shares could be used as collateral to create new coins which are backed by the shares. To have a good transaction currency in my opinion you want to avoid both inflation and deflation so that the price is stable. Most people aren't going to want to store their life savings in a transaction currency though so if you want investment and long term users you need to create a good store of value.
Tx based proof of stake has similar issues to those for Peercoin, in my opinion, so I'm not overly hopeful.  Even my proposed system has some issues, though, but I think it's an improvement.
I'm interested in seeing both of these solutions in action. If there is a way that we can agree upon to quantify the level of decentralization of the network we can use that as a metric to try and measure the success of things. What I do know is that Bitcoin isn't decentralized and if they stick with sha-256 there is no hope it will ever be.

The solution I would like to see and that I've been promoting is to have the hashing algorithm randomized so that no one group of people can optimize for it. If it changes at random intervals to a random hashing algorithm then you can't prepare in advance with a sha-256 asic farm or a scrypt mining farm. You simply will not know what the next hashing algorithm will be, how many days it will be in effect, and you would have to prepare for all the possible algorithms and have to purchase all machines or just pay really close attention to track it.

The other idea is the lottery effect where there is an occasional jackpot. The basic idea is if you put enough uncertainty into mining then no one can plan ahead and it becomes less about how much money you have to spend on chips or how many chips you have and more about how much you're paying attention and whether or not you're waiting for the opportunity to use whatever you do have when an algorithm and scheme favorable to your specifications kick in.

I understand this sort of randomized hashing would be a nightmare to code so it's only theoretical. I think the original whitepaper you had was to be something like that, so it's possible at least in theory.

That's the point, yeah.  The problem with Bitcoin is that once you get to the fees level of inflation (inflation = 0), you run into the problem that no one wants to conduct on-chain txs because it's poorly incentivized.  So, ultimately, for the system to continue functioning, you need to enact some inflation.  I chose exponentially increasing inflation, like fiat, but at considerable slower rates of inflation per year than are standard.  The reserve banking system (when/if it gets off the ground) is then intended to be a more dynamic system that is more responsive to world economic rates of inflation as determined by public oracle consensus.
I think there are ways around inflation but it's still experimental. I think you could simply just destroy the fees and the shares in the network would appreciate as the coins get destroyed. Of course miners would not have incentives at this time but once the mining network is fully built out I don't think miners will need that kind of incentive anymore. If you think of coins destroyed as a dividend, and then make everyone on the network a miner, why wouldn't that work?

The amount of hashing power available in 20-30 years if it's decentralized could be so ubiquitous and so cheap that you won't need to give any incentive directly to miners in the form of new fresh coins. You could destroy the coins at a 1-5% rate and disperse the incentive *which under the currently centralized Bitcoin network would go to a centralized cartel of miners as new coins* instead onto every participant in the network equally. As coins get destroyed with every transaction the fees would give a deflationary dividend to all who hold coins in the network. As a result of this dividend that would be continuously dispersed, their coins would become more scarce and thus more valuable so that the hashing power gets cheaper for them as their buying power increases.

And because technology is inherently deflationary, there is a synergy there. I admit this is theoretical so I only present it as an idea to consider rather than as a solution.
My gut feeling is that neither inflation nor deflation solve what is a considerable social and philosophical problem: that people will more money end up usually having the means to obtain more money, regardless of the financial system they are working under.
My argument is that because technology is deflationary (Moore's law), the currency backed by that technology should be deflationary. It's technological determinism. The focus in my opinion should not be on people and the pursuit of money, but on making technology more accessible and cheaper so that the cost of living decreases with deflation. If the rich are getting richer in numbers in some ledger but for everyone else the cost of living is going down then everyone wins. The rich feel richer and can invest in even more sophisticated technology, and poverty eventually ceases to exist because you can theoretically rely on automation, 3d printing, and decentralization.

Again this is highly theoretical, speculative, and philosophical so there is room for debate here. I just think human labor over time is being phased out in favor of automation and that technology will determine if poverty exists not monetary policy.

Having slow exponential inflation also insures investment into mining technologies in the future, as the hardware will continually be useful.  However, with Bitcoin, eventually when inflation = 0, hardware investment will probably fall apart as far as I can tell.
I think it's the opposite. If buying power goes down over time you could end up with the opposite effect. I think if inflation is low enough you could be right in the short term, but over the long term I think Moore's law is deflationary and when that kicks in the hashing power will just become cheaper at a faster and faster rate. The only way to find out is to watch what happens with 1% inflation and always leave in the capability of putting things into deflationary mode at a later date.
Well, having something like this functional (useful PoW) is one of the the holy grails of cryptocurrencies, but doing it in a way that is decentralized seems unlikely at the current time.  You can kind of hack it on (e.g. RippleLabs), but you need to rely on centralization of some kind to make this work.  
I agree right now it is too centralized. I think we will be able to decentralize it eventually using a DAC though. So I'm actually very hopeful on this front.

SCIPs can give some kind of voodoo black moon magic approach to this where you can verify that you'd done some kind of very complex work very quickly and easily so long as you disseminate a massive (gigabytes or terabytes) consensus parameter set.  These are a relatively new technology though, and I want to see how ZeroCash fares with them (they'll be the first currency to use them, for the sake of anonymizing cash flow).

Very interesting. I think theoretically once we have infrastructure to have DACs and other tools available it wont be so hard to let the network itself or the artificial intelligence itself pay the human beings to do certain tasks on a list are are voted on. In that atmosphere it becomes possible to make Proof of Work beneficial and decentralized if human beings are used to verify the work or some process which uses human labor by paying human beings a bounty or fee is put in place.

I hope whatever Proof of Work you do decide to use is modular enough that you could switch it out for something better or improve upon it at a later time. As long as you have the flexibility to future proof it then it will be great.

Some additional information
http://www.bloomberg.com/video/how-technology-is-driving-deflation-everywhere-aOgVQHcASBqwtc9uFa1AGA.html
Luckybit
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 714
Merit: 500



View Profile
February 27, 2014, 01:53:27 AM
 #89

The only argument I can make for having a higher supply is for psychological effect. Like with Dogecoin because there are so many everyone who has them feels rich. People look at Bitcoin and they think Oh My God it's too expensive!

So you want enough of a supply so people even in third world countries can afford to have a chance. Long term it does make sense only if you think people wouldn't buy coins in fractions. I do think people could be convinced to buy coins in fractions though so I favor selling the coins in the Satoshi denomination.

Another thing which could be done. We have Netcoin as the highest unit but if there were fewer and not many people have them then you would use the highest unit for large transfers between businesses and for daily transactions people would use the smaller proportions.

Now this is important to note, depending on the blockchain technology and whether or not you can handle a lot of transactions should decide whether you go with a smaller or larger cap or even no cap.

If there is no cap then you still must limit inflation, as that is what is bad. If the cap is low or high it does not matter if inflation is 50%. If inflation is low, and the cap is low of course that is better. If inflation is zero and the cap is low like Mastercoin, Counterparty, of course that is best of all but then it's not much of a currency for transaction purposes and more of a stock.

What psychology do we want? To attract investors the cap and low inflation rate is good. To make people spend money having a higher cap is better because people are more likely to tip in a currency where they feel like a billionaire. The profit investors would make is the same no matter what the cap is, just so long as the inflation rate is low.

I prefer a higher cap in either case, because for whatever insane reason the laymen seem to believe that if the price of a single unit is lower it's somehow a better investment.  I want low long term exponential inflation, so that when compared to fiat it's much more desirable to hold MC2 coins.

Initially the coin will lower tx throughput than even Bitcoin, so we need to take this into account too.  In the future I can work on optimizations, but I wanna get the chain up and running first and then worry about that.

As long as inflation is low then investors will love it. As long as your inflation is justified then we know your reasons for including it are sane and rational.

If there is enough flexibility in the protocol so that it can adapt to new technological ideas or changes in the global economy then it will work out fine.
cdog
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 784
Merit: 500



View Profile
March 08, 2014, 08:49:40 PM
 #90

From a laymans perspective its much better to say "there will be 500M coins total ever" than "there is no cap but there is inflation blah blah blah"

This is one thing that appeals to people about Bitcoin. Theres 21M coins, so each coin is rare and unique. Thats important, from a marketing perspective.

When Doge went uncapped, I knew of a couple people who just dropped out because they didnt understand the technology and how Doge could have value being "infinite."

Peoples perceptions are just as important as reality when it comes to marketing.

tacotime
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484
Merit: 1000



View Profile
March 09, 2014, 09:00:56 PM
 #91

Hi everyone.

This may come as a surprise, but I'm hoping it will come as good news to everyone out there.

I am eliminating any premine on this cryptocurrency.  I plan to do all the implementation of it over the next 4-6 months on top of btcd.

Looking back at all the cryptocurrencies that people actually have faith in, such as Bitcoin, Litecoin, and Peercoin, it seems like the only practical and fair way with which to launch a cryptocurrency is by doing so without the premine.  The people who will benefit from such a model will be you, the future users.  In the spirit of everything that this community has ever been about, it seems only appropriate to try to develop this myself while I live off of my own savings.  It'll be a rough road ahead, but I hope I will have the continual backing of the community for choosing to develop this for everyone's benefit with no monetary expectations in return.

Development will formally commence tomorrow, and I have left my job so I am free to work on this full time.

I will still release the software as binaries for the first month or two, then formalize a public github repo (to prevent initial forks).  I'll have put too much of my life into this by the time of release to have it forked as whatever-coin in the first couple of months, and I hope the community can agree with me on this sentiment.  Any members of the community who wish to audit the code are welcome to talk to me.

Code:
XMR: 44GBHzv6ZyQdJkjqZje6KLZ3xSyN1hBSFAnLP6EAqJtCRVzMzZmeXTC2AHKDS9aEDTRKmo6a6o9r9j86pYfhCWDkKjbtcns
tacotime
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1484
Merit: 1000



View Profile
March 09, 2014, 09:02:40 PM
 #92

From a laymans perspective its much better to say "there will be 500M coins total ever" than "there is no cap but there is inflation blah blah blah"

This is one thing that appeals to people about Bitcoin. Theres 21M coins, so each coin is rare and unique. Thats important, from a marketing perspective.

When Doge went uncapped, I knew of a couple people who just dropped out because they didnt understand the technology and how Doge could have value being "infinite."

Peoples perceptions are just as important as reality when it comes to marketing.

I'll probably state something along the lines of, "There will be x many coins published in the period of time where the per-block supply in decreasing, which is during the first y years."

Code:
XMR: 44GBHzv6ZyQdJkjqZje6KLZ3xSyN1hBSFAnLP6EAqJtCRVzMzZmeXTC2AHKDS9aEDTRKmo6a6o9r9j86pYfhCWDkKjbtcns
_ingsoc
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 452
Merit: 250



View Profile WWW
March 09, 2014, 09:18:48 PM
 #93

Development will formally commence tomorrow, and I have left my job so I am free to work on this full time.

I'll be around to work on this as well. I'll be putting up the sites as soon as our machine is ready where we'll host all of it. As always, anyone is free to get in touch and help dev anything that needs doing! Smiley

MadCow
Hero Member
*****
Offline Offline

Activity: 655
Merit: 500



View Profile
March 09, 2014, 11:19:40 PM
 #94

Hi everyone.

This may come as a surprise, but I'm hoping it will come as good news to everyone out there.

I am eliminating any premine on this cryptocurrency.  I plan to do all the implementation of it over the next 4-6 months on top of btcd.

Looking back at all the cryptocurrencies that people actually have faith in, such as Bitcoin, Litecoin, and Peercoin, it seems like the only practical and fair way with which to launch a cryptocurrency is by doing so without the premine.  The people who will benefit from such a model will be you, the future users.  In the spirit of everything that this community has ever been about, it seems only appropriate to try to develop this myself while I live off of my own savings.  It'll be a rough road ahead, but I hope I will have the continual backing of the community for choosing to develop this for everyone's benefit with no monetary expectations in return.

Development will formally commence tomorrow, and I have left my job so I am free to work on this full time.

I will still release the software as binaries for the first month or two, then formalize a public github repo (to prevent initial forks).  I'll have put too much of my life into this by the time of release to have it forked as whatever-coin in the first couple of months, and I hope the community can agree with me on this sentiment.  Any members of the community who wish to audit the code are welcome to talk to me.

Good for you taco! Follow your gut instinct. I'm still very keen to invest some funds in your work, send me a PM if you need support.
Good luck!
Korean
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Activity: 138
Merit: 100


View Profile
March 10, 2014, 04:34:21 AM
 #95

What will the coin per year outlook look like now?
canth
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1442
Merit: 1000



View Profile
March 10, 2014, 05:43:59 PM
 #96

Premine or no premine, full openness and transparency is a key part of any successful project. If this is the direction you are looking to take, all the power to you Taco. We'll be here when you need us to support you.

Zisef
Member
**
Offline Offline

Activity: 118
Merit: 10


View Profile
March 16, 2014, 11:26:34 PM
 #97

The community will reward your efforts and hard work!
CoinHoarder
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 1456
Merit: 1024

In Cryptocoins I Trust


View Profile
March 17, 2014, 12:23:32 PM
 #98

Hi everyone.

This may come as a surprise, but I'm hoping it will come as good news to everyone out there.

I am eliminating any premine on this cryptocurrency.  I plan to do all the implementation of it over the next 4-6 months on top of btcd.

Looking back at all the cryptocurrencies that people actually have faith in, such as Bitcoin, Litecoin, and Peercoin, it seems like the only practical and fair way with which to launch a cryptocurrency is by doing so without the premine.  The people who will benefit from such a model will be you, the future users.  In the spirit of everything that this community has ever been about, it seems only appropriate to try to develop this myself while I live off of my own savings.  It'll be a rough road ahead, but I hope I will have the continual backing of the community for choosing to develop this for everyone's benefit with no monetary expectations in return.

Development will formally commence tomorrow, and I have left my job so I am free to work on this full time.

I will still release the software as binaries for the first month or two, then formalize a public github repo (to prevent initial forks).  I'll have put too much of my life into this by the time of release to have it forked as whatever-coin in the first couple of months, and I hope the community can agree with me on this sentiment.  Any members of the community who wish to audit the code are welcome to talk to me.

I think this is a good move regarding no premine. Kudos to you by the way, I hope others are willing to help.

If you need anything from me let me know. I'm not smart enough to contribute any code, but anything else just ask and you shall receive.

Thanks & good luck with the development!
td services
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Activity: 448
Merit: 250


black swan hunter


View Profile
March 17, 2014, 03:32:59 PM
 #99

I would have preferred premine and presale. This is simple and easiest to invest in, like Mastercoin, and raises money for development. Now it sounds like this coin will become a hobby. Nice idea, hope it succeeds, but I won't hold my breath.
peled1986
Legendary
*
Offline Offline

Activity: 882
Merit: 1000


View Profile
March 18, 2014, 01:17:22 AM
 #100

Looking back at all the cryptocurrencies that people actually have faith in, such as Bitcoin, Litecoin, and Peercoin, it seems like the only practical and fair way with which to launch a cryptocurrency is by doing so without the premine.  

I think you can have a "fair" coin with premine and "unfair" coin without premine.
I am sure you can think of a few examples.
full openness and transparency is a key.
Pages: « 1 2 3 4 [5]  All
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Bitcointalk.org is not available or authorized for sale. Do not believe any fake listings.
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!