★ ZEIT ★ [COMMUNITY & KNIGHTS] [ULTRA LOW INFLATION] [MICRO-PAYMENTS]

[uki]

how about option number 3: cutting three zeros and lowering the inflation?
that would definitely boost the price per coin.

Everyone has all ready agreed to Option 2,  which is lowering the inflation rate
Just waiting on the real world to release enough of Rent_a_Ray's time so he can make the changes.

Cutting the zeros as you say would make no difference except crashing our marketcap from
~$200,000  , take away 3 zeros , to ~$200 ,
If we did that we might as well just shoot ZEIT in the head , because either of those would kill it.  
Which is why we are not doing that.

 

Not everyone, I didn't.
I believe we already agreed in this thread that a so called 'market cap', a product of current price and total number of coins, has very little if nothing to do with how good or bad a coin does. For all these who think otherwise I have  the following deal: I can sell 100M ZEIT (to make you Knight) for 10 sat a piece, if you really feel that selling at some minor exchange 50 ZEIT at 10 sat makes ZEIT's market cap 10 sat * 35 billion.
Just to put your money where your mouth is.

There is nothing bad in having market cap (as defined above) of $200, if that is really where realistically ZEIT is at the moment. Did ZEIT die because of that? No. It is just one of the zillion forgotten altcoins that has relatively little to offer. Correct me, if I am wrong, but what would you tell a new investor, a Knight wannabe, to convince him/her to choose ZEIT. How this coin differs from the competition?
The best evidence that the things are not going in the right direction is the number of Knights so far. Having 14 people around for the three years of coin history is not the best result if you ask me, and the price is a consequence of that. Not the other way around.

To me having a moving average of the volume in all exchanges a coin is traded over, say, last seven days is a much better proxy for a market cap, if it is to bear any meaning. And, if we look at the current ZEIT volumes, we hardly ever exceeded 1BTC of daily volume in the last, how many days? 6 months? 1 year?
Or to put it the other way, how many days in the last year we had a combined daily volume to exceed 1 BTC?

Tweaking only PoS won't fix that, you may keep that sentence for the record. What we need is an organic development to increase the adoption rate. And possibly a more human-friendly number of coins.

[podizzler3000]

im pretty sure the high float ensures the security of the chain. it also attracts more people who enjoy accumulating for a lower cost, increasing the amount of nodes. as it stands zeit fills a very important niche in the crypto space: a POS coin with high float & no premine. I think that 37B is a much more human friendly number than 37M. The most popular world currency (USD) has trillions in existence.

I understand your concerns but I think we should give the ultra-low % inflation its fair chance. If you follow altcoins some of the most successful were ones that started out with high inflation then switched to ultralow. only they did it for 3 weeks and then switched. now imagine a coin that had 3 years to mature before beginning its price ascent. its like awakening the sleeping dragon.

[uki]

im pretty sure the high float ensures the security of the chain. it also attracts more people who enjoy accumulating for a lower cost, increasing the amount of nodes. as it stands zeit fills a very important niche in the crypto space: a POS coin with high float & no premine. I think that 37B is a much more human friendly number than 37M. The most popular world currency (USD) has trillions in existence.

I understand your concerns but I think we should give the ultra-low % inflation its fair chance. If you follow altcoins some of the most successful were ones that started out with high inflation then switched to ultralow. only they did it for 3 weeks and then switched. now imagine a coin that had 3 years to mature before beginning its price ascent. its like awakening the sleeping dragon.

Regarding low inflation, I agree it is a 'must action' for ZEIT. No doubt about it. But my point is, it shouldn't be the only action taken, to make this coin really work. ZEIT needs more to be done in terms of development (and adoption subsequently), and slowly it is becoming critical, if we don't want to stay a small closed group, as we were in the last 18 months or so.

Now regarding coinage. Is there really a need for such a massive number of coins? Just asking it out loud, because volume seems to show something different. Zillions coinage is a relict from the times where any single combination of altcoin parameters was released as a brand-new altcoin idea. These ZEIT's are long gone, why do we need to stick to the idea that has been proven wrong?

[vella85]

im pretty sure the high float ensures the security of the chain. it also attracts more people who enjoy accumulating for a lower cost, increasing the amount of nodes. as it stands zeit fills a very important niche in the crypto space: a POS coin with high float & no premine. I think that 37B is a much more human friendly number than 37M. The most popular world currency (USD) has trillions in existence.

I understand your concerns but I think we should give the ultra-low % inflation its fair chance. If you follow altcoins some of the most successful were ones that started out with high inflation then switched to ultralow. only they did it for 3 weeks and then switched. now imagine a coin that had 3 years to mature before beginning its price ascent. its like awakening the sleeping dragon.

I agree with what you are saying to give the ultra low inflation a chance for now. I just hope you are right and that some time in the future we start to see ZEIT rise in price again. I noticed that in the last 24 hours the price has risen but it was all traded in Doge. We need to see more trading volume in BTC I think. In the meantime I will continue to hold my ZEIT and wait for the day the price starts to rise back up to where it deserves to be.

[trnpall]

Bitcoin ETF getting turned down the way it was, seems like it helped reaffirm what cryptocoins are

[podizzler3000]

ZEIT getting closer and closer to top 100 market cap!

[vella85]

ZEIT getting closer and closer to top 100 market cap!

Yes we sure are and ZEIT getting into the top 100 crypto coins would be a great achievement for the coin. Once this is achieved the next step would be to make it into the top 50, this will take time but I believe ZEIT has the potential to achieve this in the future. ZEIT is up 17% in the last 24 hours however all that was traded in Doge once again, we need to start seeing more ZEIT traded in BTC and hopefully that will start to happen soon.

[trnpall]

No Top 100, if zeitcoin does not change to ultra low

[uki]

No Top 100, if zeitcoin does not change to ultra low

Probably no Top 100, if that is all the change that we will have to offer.
Look how many other ultra low PoS or even PoW are around and above on the list.

[podizzler3000]

how many had 3 years of high inflation distribution period before switching to low?

[uki]

how many had 3 years of high inflation distribution period before switching to low?

probably a few only. MINT and ZEIT that I know out of my head, not sure what else.

But what does it really mean? If you think about distribution lasting three years, you have on one hand the advantages, like no premine (check), reasonably fair distribution (these who came first have the advantage anyway, but I would give it a check, too), and, also possibly coins are wide spread (how about this one?). There are also disadvantages, like losing a lot of enthusiasts in the process (check), having effectively a very small fraction of created coins in the circulation and active at all (check), becoming an 'unattractive old lady' (don't want to offend any one in here), a coin that seems unattractive to most of the potential new investors that is only kept alive by few bag holders (check). Did I miss something (for/against)? How does this balance?

I repeat, it is not that much about coin's parameters, it is about what the coin has to offer to attract a big community. How about ZEIT?
ZEIT has so far 14 Kinghts (recruitment window is open now, no new candidates have been seen so far) and, maybe, twice as much regular members altogether (looking at the last two years in this thread).
Is it enough to survive? Sure, as long as you still care to keep your wallet up to date.
But, is it enough to become a successful coin? Most likely, not.

[kiklo]

I repeat, it is not that much about coin's parameters, it is about what the coin has to offer to attract a big community. How about ZEIT?
ZEIT has so far 14 Kinghts (recruitment window is open now, no new candidates have been seen so far) and, maybe, twice as much regular members altogether (looking at the last two years in this thread).
Is it enough to survive? Sure, as long as you still care to keep your wallet up to date.
But, is it enough to become a successful coin? Most likely, not.

There will probably be no new Knights this year, the inflation was just way too high for way too long, so even after the New Ultra Low is setup, it is going to take some time.
I am willing to be patient, as there is really no alternative unless you just want to cash out.

Even if no new knights ever join the ultra low inflation will solve the price per coin issue.  


 

[kiklo]

Now regarding coinage. Is there really a need for such a massive number of coins? Just asking it out loud, because volume seems to show something different. Zillions coinage is a relict from the times where any single combination of altcoin parameters was released as a brand-new altcoin idea. These ZEIT's are long gone, why do we need to stick to the idea that has been proven wrong?

First off ,
we have been over this , but here is a repeat if you need it.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ZEITCOIN/comments/5yjyuc/why_does_zeit_needs_36_billion_coins/

ZEIT intention is to be a Global, used by the entire World's Populace, as such, There needs to be enough coins to keep our price low enough per coin that everyone can own and use ZEIT. Many people forget that $1 US , could be an entire day's wages in some other countries, plus the fact a Major Market for Crypto is the MicroPayments Markets. Decreasing our # of coins to less than 1 billion insures , our Price will go to high and not be affordable for Micropayments, and many Foreign Nations. ZEIT was always intented for the World's Populace not a bunch of Elite Asshats, there are already plenty of those , ZEIT is Different and we will be unstoppable next to those toy coins with tiny numbers. Other Factors are the more coins per Block a PoST coin has, the more secure it is from attacks from those that wish it harm , like a history rewrite.

hashProofOfStake is what protects our blocks from being overwritten, by long or short range or history rewrite attacks.

hashProofOfStake <= [Coin-age] x [Difficulty]

[Coin-age] = [amount of coins] x [days in stake]

Example

Amount of coins in a staked block = 10000

Difficulty =2

Days in Stake = 5

[Coin-age] = [amount of coins] x [days in stake]
50000 = 10000 x 5

hashProofOfStake <= [Coin-age] x [Difficulty]
100000 = 50000 x 2

If we decrease /reverse swap by 100 to 1 then the Amount of coins in a staked block = 100

[Coin-age] = [amount of coins] x [days in stake]
500 = 100 x 5

hashProofOfStake <= [Coin-age] x [Difficulty]
1000 = 500 x 2

Instead of a hashProofOfStake of 100000 protecting the block, then our security will be 100 times weaker if we go with a reverse swap. Which would make us more vulnerable to all kinds of nasty attacks that we are currently invulnerable too.

So the Answers why our Numbers are so high:

Global Usage for the World Requires it & Also the very Security of the Coin itself requires it.

 

[podizzler3000]

also i would add mintcoin is 5% still. so zeit would be the only coin in history to explore this proof of stake model of distribution. no proof of stake coin has matured to the point where a transaction fee is incentive to stake. it is the fully evolved framework and something we can see happen here given the opportunity.

[uki]

Now regarding coinage. Is there really a need for such a massive number of coins? Just asking it out loud, because volume seems to show something different. Zillions coinage is a relict from the times where any single combination of altcoin parameters was released as a brand-new altcoin idea. These ZEIT's are long gone, why do we need to stick to the idea that has been proven wrong?

First off ,
we have been over this , but here is a repeat if you need it.

https://www.reddit.com/r/ZEITCOIN/comments/5yjyuc/why_does_zeit_needs_36_billion_coins/

ZEIT intention is to be a Global, used by the entire World's Populace, as such, There needs to be enough coins to keep our price low enough per coin that everyone can own and use ZEIT. Many people forget that $1 US , could be an entire day's wages in some other countries, plus the fact a Major Market for Crypto is the MicroPayments Markets. Decreasing our # of coins to less than 1 billion insures , our Price will go to high and not be affordable for Micropayments, and many Foreign Nations. ZEIT was always intented for the World's Populace not a bunch of Elite Asshats, there are already plenty of those , ZEIT is Different and we will be unstoppable next to those toy coins with tiny numbers. Other Factors are the more coins per Block a PoST coin has, the more secure it is from attacks from those that wish it harm , like a history rewrite.

hashProofOfStake is what protects our blocks from being overwritten, by long or short range or history rewrite attacks.

hashProofOfStake <= [Coin-age] x [Difficulty]

[Coin-age] = [amount of coins] x [days in stake]

Example

Amount of coins in a staked block = 10000

Difficulty =2

Days in Stake = 5

[Coin-age] = [amount of coins] x [days in stake]
50000 = 10000 x 5

hashProofOfStake <= [Coin-age] x [Difficulty]
100000 = 50000 x 2

If we decrease /reverse swap by 100 to 1 then the Amount of coins in a staked block = 100

[Coin-age] = [amount of coins] x [days in stake]
500 = 100 x 5

hashProofOfStake <= [Coin-age] x [Difficulty]
1000 = 500 x 2

Instead of a hashProofOfStake of 100000 protecting the block, then our security will be 100 times weaker if we go with a reverse swap. Which would make us more vulnerable to all kinds of nasty attacks that we are currently invulnerable too.

So the Answers why our Numbers are so high:

Global Usage for the World Requires it & Also the very Security of the Coin itself requires it.

 

Well, you have eight decimal places so even if the unit price is big, you are good enough to make it arbitrary low. (btw. either way, be it with huge numbers or with many zeros in front, an average Joe will have difficulties to grasp the meaning of it, being used to the fiat system).

Theoretically, you are right. Planning a globally accepted coin you have to think big. The problem I see, is, however, practically we are one of a zillion of insignificant coins that exists into the altcoins sphere. How would you convince a new user or investor to put, say $1k of his, hers, hard earned money into ZEIT, instead of any other coin?

Also, and that is finally touching the point I am trying to make here since quite a long time, if something is going wrong and you are afraid of introducing changes looking for the excuses like 'that is impossible with our code's (which btw. I have heard in many projects) then you are destined to vanish. If the code is an obstacle why not writing one that will permit such functionality? In the example above you may increase minimum value of the days in stake variable to keep hash proof of stake high, don't you?
In the end of the day, with bigger unit you may wait say 100 days to make your 0.0000001 gain on pos, instead of getting the fraction of it every 5 days. If we are thinking big there should be enough nodes in the network to keep it running even if we stack every 100 days.

[kiklo]

Well, you have eight decimal places so even if the unit price is big, you are good enough to make it arbitrary low. (btw. either way, be it with huge numbers or with many zeros in front, an average Joe will have difficulties to grasp the meaning of it, being used to the fiat system).

Theoretically, you are right. Planning a globally accepted coin you have to think big. The problem I see, is, however, practically we are one of a zillion of insignificant coins that exists into the altcoins sphere. How would you convince a new user or investor to put, say $1k of his, hers, hard earned money into ZEIT, instead of any other coin?

Also, and that is finally touching the point I am trying to make here since quite a long time, if something is going wrong and you are afraid of introducing changes looking for the excuses like 'that is impossible with our code's (which btw. I have heard in many projects) then you are destined to vanish. If the code is an obstacle why not writing one that will permit such functionality? In the example above you may increase minimum value of the days in stake variable to keep hash proof of stake high, don't you?
In the end of the day, with bigger unit you may wait say 100 days to make your 0.0000001 gain on pos, instead of getting the fraction of it every 5 days. If we are thinking big there should be enough nodes in the network to keep it running even if we stack every 100 days.

I am not going to have to convince any one , the facts will convince any one that bothers to look.
Our Price per coin will increase and therefore the marketcap will increase, that marketcap is the only advertisement we are going to need for a while.
Once it reaches high enough, then we can focus on getting out to the general populace thru paid advertisements.

Excuse me, who was it arguing for the ultra low inflation changes.
(it was me, I am not afraid of dramatic changes and will be paying directly out of my pocket 50 million Zeit to stakers and the Zeit jousting tournaments once Ray make the changes.)

The whole point is to move from an unsustainable Proof of Stake Inflationary model , to a sustainable Proof of Stake Transactions model ,
meaning you can make more coins from processing the transactions that you will from staking the blocks.
Unsustainable & Sustainable are in reference to the effects PoS inflation has on the price of a coin, not its energy usage which is equal.

Diving ZEIT#s by 3 zeros, stops global usage , cripples our network security , and destroys the chance for our marketcap to become that beacon that draws the larger community that we all want.
That is why I am against it. It would directly block what we need to happen with the Marketcap's advertising our coin.
Keeping Micro payments, being used Globally, staying usable in foreign markets are all part of the plan.
Much of the infrastructure we need has not been built yet , but it is getting there.
Sites like PoSwallet.com are needed , so that people like in Haiti  , that all have cell phones can access ZEIT, and use it there.
With Ultra Low Inflation , our price will stabilize and these poorer countries will be able to use our coin for their economies and as it's use grows there so its price will grow to the point that even 1st world countries use it , ZEIT will be an excellent form of barter payment between individuals and more.  

 

FYI:
In a PoS coin people stake whenever they want and leave their wallet closed for weeks at a time, never really losing anything.
In a PoST coin , people earn more from the transaction fees than the PoS reward,
so they make more coins by staking more blocks to earn more fees,  the less blocks they stake the less they earn,
it is a direct incentive to stay online and staking more than a standard PoS coin.  

[uki]

Diving ZEIT#s by 3 zeros, stops global usage , cripples our network security , and destroys the chance for our marketcap to become that beacon that draws the larger community that we all want.
That is why I am against it. It would directly block what we need to happen with the Marketcap's advertising our coin.
[...]

I believe we already agreed that the notion of 'market cap' used for altcoins is absolutely meaningless (my offer to sell 100M ZEIT at 10 sat to prove me wrong is still open and I doubt anybody will accept it), and so is the value of such an 'advertisement'. If that is the only way we want to draw the attention of broader public then we may as well keep the current PoS rate forever. We will grow the 'market cap', keeping the astonishing volume on all exchanges combined below 1BTC for 364 days of the year, as it happened last year.   

[podizzler3000]

ok i will bet you 10M zeit that when the market cap hits 3600 btc (10 sats) the 24hr volume will be more than 1btc.

[uki]

ok i will bet you 10M zeit that when the market cap hits 3600 btc (10 sats) the 24hr volume will be more than 1btc.

That will be this single day out of the whole year, like last year. that is why I wrote 364 days, not 365.

[kiklo]

Diving ZEIT#s by 3 zeros, stops global usage , cripples our network security , and destroys the chance for our marketcap to become that beacon that draws the larger community that we all want.
That is why I am against it. It would directly block what we need to happen with the Marketcap's advertising our coin.
[...]

I believe we already agreed that the notion of 'market cap' used for altcoins is absolutely meaningless (my offer to sell 100M ZEIT at 10 sat to prove me wrong is still open and I doubt anybody will accept it), and so is the value of such an 'advertisement'. If that is the only way we want to draw the attention of broader public then we may as well keep the current PoS rate forever. We will grow the 'market cap', keeping the astonishing volume on all exchanges combined below 1BTC for 364 days of the year, as it happened last year.   

Uki,
No one but you believes that nonsense that the marketcap does not matter.
So I don't know why you are thinking anyone agreed with you.