The Burning Project - Investors, Developers, Advisors needed!

[legendster]

Burning Bitcoin offline is easy. Transfer to a Drive and destroy the drive. Same with paper wallet, there you will actually get the satisfaction of burning it.

How will you prove your didn't make another copy? The only way to prove nobody can access coins ever again is by sending them to a burn address.

That's the solution I am looking for. To create a burn address system that will irrevocably destroy an existing asset and replace it with new Phoenixes / Ash.

Changing the topic a bit here But this isn't true 'burning' IMO. What happens when we master the art of quantum computing in the next 5-10 decades? A quantum computer will be able to crack these 'Burn' addresses and retrieve the bitcoins. What you are doing here is basically donating your bitcoins to person/entity who will avail these bitcoins in the future. Consider it a sort of smart contract  

That's dumb. If the burned tokens are bought/sold then that will devaluate the generated Phoenix / Ash as well. The only way Phoenix will gain value is by decreasing the volume of other assets that are in limited supply to begin with and replacing them with Ash / Phoenix.
The point of this discussion is to get people who are interested in this idea to work together and build something new and better with transparency.

[legendster]

Ok, I understand the concept, but why would people want to burn a high priced coin like Bitcoin, for a possible lower valued Phoenix token? Will this be a 1 to 1 reward for the bitcoins that are burnt or would the person burning his bitcoins, get a equal valued amount of tokens for the bitcoins he burnt?

Say, 2000 Phoenix tokens valued at $500 for 0.07841 bitcoin valued at $500 <at todays value of $6 377/bitcoin>

Is the exchange for burning bitcoins an economical decision or just a little reward incentive for doing it?

That's the idea. There is no inherent value of Phoenix at the point of generation, but rather the value of the destroyed asset that would be destroyed to generate Phoenix. Which - would be decided by the open market.

To explain better, here's an example :
Say there are no Phoenix at the moment. So the value of Phoenix is 0 and ∞ depending on who wants to generate the first Phoenix.

To note, there will be XXX number of Phoenix that can be generated. No more.

Now someone burns 1 BTC in the system then they will be rewarded with and instant reward : Phoenix and some locked Phoenix rewards : Ash which will slowly unlock more Phoenixes for a period and then the Ash will itself be depleted. The generation/conversion power of Phonenix from Ash will decrease logarithmically over a set period of time.

Now, theoretically, for the first generation of Phoenix blocks :
1 Phoenix = Total Potential Phoenix Generated = Instant generation of Phoenix + Ash (Locked Phoenix) = 1 Btc's USD value at that point of burning - in the open market.

There will be no direct inflow of FIAT > Phoenix


So if you destroy $1m worth of Bitcoins for Phoenixes, then you will get $1m worth of Phoenixes.

Now, there will be bonuses for early generators - which is what I hope will be the enticement for investors. Then technically their 1 mil could be multiplied by the bonus they will get.

[jwaynedohnson23]

Burn address is the way to go man

[legendster]

That's the idea. There is no inherent value of Phoenix at the point of generation, but rather the value of the destroyed asset that would be destroyed to generate Phoenix. Which - would be decided by the open market.

Well, the 'open market' doesn't work that way... More supply usually means lower price and each time someone burns a cryptocurrency more of Phoenixes come into existence, driving its price down rather than up. Locking up tokens could work in this scenario if you want to raise the price of Phoenix. But my question is if the people who want to destroy a coin for fun or whatever their fucked up reason is, why do they want/expect to get rewarded?

Listen mate! Don't like the idea then stop fucking around in this thread. Ask nicely and you will be explained. I'm not going to sit here and read your fucked up language. Clear?

-
After being an economics student and being a forex/crypto trader for the last 7 - 9 years I think I have an understanding of how open market works.

-
You got part of it correct.

Increasing supply does decrease price but there is 0 supply to begin with and there can only be a certain number of Phoenix that will exist. Ever. So if you don't want Phoenix then keep holding on to your asset and never bother. Phoenix for you will not exist.

The concept is :

There is a non-stop increase in digital assets especially cryptos. That's equivalent to an uncontrollable rate of inflation.
As FIAT will keep getting produced by the governments and someone or the other with a large bucket of FIAT currency will invest in some altcoin out there. Resulting in more money being created out of no where.
There is no system in place in the crypto-verse where this steady inflow of money is countered with a steady reduction in the amount of available money and digital assets in the crypto-world.

Burn address is the way to go man

If you read everything then you will realize the whole project is way more complicated than what a simple burn address would be able to accomplish.

[Thekool1s]

Listen mate! Don't like the idea then stop fucking around in this thread. Ask nicely and you will be explained. I'm not going to sit here and read your fucked up language. Clear?

But my question is if the people who want to destroy a coin for fun or whatever their fucked up reason is, why do they want/expect to get rewarded?

First of all, this wasn't pointed at you. I was referring to other people who would want to burn up their coins. Second, I do like the idea of 'reduction in supply', I have studied economics myself. Anyway if you feel like I overstepped, Apologies. I am not one of those assholes who would feel belittled by apologizing. Anyway moving on.

there can only be a certain number of Phoenix that will exist.

Got it, But what happens when the Last Phoenix is given out? How will the burning work then? Bitcoin has 'fees' which will reward the miners, What will the 'burners' have?

[legendster]

First of all, this wasn't pointed at you. I was referring to other people who would want to burn up their coins. Second, I do like the idea of 'reduction in supply', I have studied economics myself. Anyway if you feel like I overstepped, Apologies. I am not one of those assholes who would feel belittled by apologizing. Anyway moving on.

I have a low tolerance for BS. Nothing personal. Let's move on.  

there can only be a certain number of Phoenix that will exist.

Got it, But what happens when the Last Phoenix is given out? How will the burning work then? Bitcoin has 'fees' which will reward the miners, What will the 'burners' have?

Good question.

What would happen to Bitcoin if the last one is mined? Bitcoin will continue to exist but there will no longer be any more mineable coins.

Same theory applies here. The total available supply for Phoenix would equal to the total circulating supply of Phoenix. Having burnt other coins to come to existence.

The burn system can then be used to burn Phoenix themselves. Burning Phoenix at that point would remove that Phoenix from the circulating supply and release them over a longer period of time, this could be incrementally longer each time the burn event occurs. This would also temporarily boost the then value of Phoenix as there would be a reduction in the total number of circulating Phoenix.

Early burners would get a extra Phoenix in Ash the amount of reward for burning would keep decreasing until at last when nearing the total supply of Phoenix at which point the excess reward would be 0.

[cescudero95]

Dang, you got me with the clickbait.  What's the progress on this so far?

[Thekool1s]

I have a low tolerance for BS. Nothing personal. Let's move on.  Smiley

Cool

The burn system can then be used to burn Phoenix themselves. Burning Phoenix at that point would remove that Phoenix from the circulating supply and release them over a longer period of time, this could be incrementally longer each time the burn event occurs. This would also temporarily boost the then value of Phoenix as there would be a reduction in the total number of circulating Phoenix.

Early burners would get a extra Phoenix in Ash the amount of reward for burning would keep decreasing until at last when nearing the total supply of Phoenix at which point the excess reward would be 0.

Hmm, So if i understand this correctly Phoenix will work something like this.

1) Early burners would get Phoenix plus the 'promised' ash.
2) People will keep burning cryptos till the last phoenix is given out.
3) The 'Promised' ashs in the meanwhile will keep evolving into 'Phoenixes'.

Will these 'evolved' Phoenixes generate new 'ashs'? Have you thought of something to make this a continuous process instead of it stopping at one stage?

[legendster]

Dang, you got me with the clickbait.  What's the progress on this so far?

Just an idea so far.

First off I'd need some people to put up the skeleton. Build the system on the cak of php / perl / with any robust database system that can handle the burning system.
At the least, I need people to help me establish the first proof of concept, so I can prepare a proper pitch deck and reach out to more VCs

Also people with deep pockets that may want to jump in early would help accelerate this faster.


But getting the right people on board to mould this out of nothing is the initial goal - which is the point of this thread.

Hmm, So if i understand this correctly Phoenix will work something like this.

1) Early burners would get Phoenix plus the 'promised' ash.
2) People will keep burning cryptos till the last phoenix is given out.
3) The 'Promised' ashs in the meanwhile will keep evolving into 'Phoenixes'.

Will these 'evolved' Phoenixes generate new 'ashs'? Have you thought of something to make this a continuous process instead of it stopping at one stage?

Ash is not 'promised' it's locked Phoenix(es). It will evolve on it's own.

And no, Ash is only obtained when something is burnt.

[HarmonyA]

Firstly, the title of your post "help me destroy bitcoin" attracted my click. The ideology is impressive but would need professional blockchain knowledge to achieve it.

[timotron]

The idea is interesting, but I can not see the value of it in the end.

First- why in hell someone would destroy a coin if you can pay caffe or anything with it?
          -If I want to destroy it coos I`m like I`m and that's fine, Why would I want the value back in another Coin?

Second- There must be at least 2 devices running a blockchain to create a coin. why not just shut down all the devices you have and delete the data in they?
              Definitely not a universal solution.

very interesting topic in any case
  Will follow.

[xtraelv]

I think I understand the economic idea behind your plan which seems sound  but I suspect that you don't quite understand how wallet addresses work.

Effectively a valid bitcoin address is between 26-35 alphanumeric characters beginning with the numbers 1 and 3

Issues:
1) A lot of wallets will prevent you from sending it to an invalid address outside of that range.
2) If a transaction is sent to an address outside of that range it can still be potentially recovered (For example as a cross chain recoveries).
3) If a transaction is sent to a wallet address (regardless of what it is) it will by default have a private key that can potentially unlock it - regardless of whether it is known or not and regardless of whether it was initially generated from a a private key or not.

The private key and wallet address are related by a complex mathematical equation.

Bitcoin is allocated to a wallet address and that record is stored on the blockchain. A private key is needed to spend those coins (transfer them to another address) .

Regardless of what you do offline - the coins are stored online on the blockchain - every wallet has an associated private key or keys - regardless of whether they are known or not.

The blockchain is a ledger. A public record of transactions. A private key is the mathematically related secret alphanumeric passphrase associated with the wallet address that allows you to generate a message acceptable to the blockchain that provides the ability to transfer it from one address to another.


Chart source: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Address

The aim is to destroy the consumed coins and be never accessible by anyone. Essentially taking them away from the market and in turn they would be replaced by these newly generated 'Phoenix' tokens/coins.
If you are interested in getting onboard as a coder, DM me, we can have further discussions about this.

And its not going to be a wallet ergo a single wallet solution.
The idea is to design a system that will consume inputs - tokens / other cryptos, irrevocably removing them from circulation and the free market.
AND in turn generating some new coins - Phoenixes.

If your concern is future recovery due to discovery of the private key there is a method to prevent this.
Rather than burning it to one address you can do it by sending dust. Effectively multiple output transactions sending the bitcoin in 1 or 10 satoshi increments to millions of addresses that of which the private keys are unknown. Making it economically not viable to recover. You could call it "Proof of ending" or "Satoshi Nakamotoed".  

Currently (under RIPE-MD160 ) there are (2^160) 1,461,501,637,330,902,918,203,684,832,716,283,019,655,932,542,976 potential bitcoin addresses and  around 2^96 private keys whose corresponding public key hashes to that address

The total size of the multiple output transaction must be under 100K bytes or it will not be included in blocks or relayed on the network.
A compressed pubkey p2pkh is 146 bytes and an uncompressed pubkey p2pkh is 178 bytes.
Source: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/How_to_cheaply_consolidate_coins_to_reduce_miner_fees

[Richie.EXUS]

What if we created the inverse of what a blockchain proof of work or proof of stake system does.

You would send those coins that needed to be burned to the Phoenix blockchain (atomic swap?) which can be viewed as it's an open ledger. The blockchain would create a wallet and encrypt the privkey on the blockchain. With every new block on the chain is simply another layer of encryption that would need to be decrypted.

I believe this can be done and even perhaps reversible, which would make it interesting as then it's basically a cryptographic wallet on the blockchain for all coins using the Phoenix blockchain. I'd imagine this can be done for loans for example or gambling.

[legendster]

What if we created the inverse of what a blockchain proof of work or proof of stake system does.

You would send those coins that needed to be burned to the Phoenix blockchain (atomic swap?) which can be viewed as it's an open ledger. The blockchain would create a wallet and encrypt the privkey on the blockchain. With every new block on the chain is simply another layer of encryption that would need to be decrypted.

I believe this can be done and even perhaps reversible, which would make it interesting as then it's basically a cryptographic wallet on the blockchain for all coins using the Phoenix blockchain. I'd imagine this can be done for loans for example or gambling.

Interesting but I have a similar but distinct plan, I'll explain this feature later, but for now I can say is that my 'way' does not stray into the lending aspect.

[legendster]

I think I understand the economic idea behind your plan which seems sound  but I suspect that you don't quite understand how wallet addresses work.

I do understand what you are infering to but I can assure you that you are not correct in your assessment.

Effectively a valid bitcoin address is between 26-35 alphanumeric characters beginning with the numbers 1 and 3

And I have said nothing about transacting inputs / outputs between wallets of different types / incompatible wallets.
Essentially the system will have gateways to accept various forms of cryptos (and later digital assets) which would channel to the correct addresses. And I think I have an idea on how to execute it, I just need someone to do it for me who understands this better than me and preferably makes a living out of this (software engg. / coder)

Issues:
1) A lot of wallets will prevent you from sending it to an invalid address outside of that range.
2) If a transaction is sent to an address outside of that range it can still be potentially recovered (For example as a cross chain recoveries).
3) If a transaction is sent to a wallet address (regardless of what it is) it will by default have a private key that can potentially unlock it - regardless of whether it is known or not and regardless of whether it was initially generated from a a private key or not.

Again, I never planned to accept multiple assets into one single wallet as I have explained above thats not how it'll work.

If your concern is future recovery due to discovery of the private key there is a method to prevent this.

Something that works with Btc might not work with a different assets.

Rather than burning it to one address you can do it by sending dust. Effectively multiple output transactions sending the bitcoin in 1 or 10 satoshi increments to millions of addresses that of which the private keys are unknown. Making it economically not viable to recover. You could call it "Proof of ending" or "Satoshi Nakamotoed".  

Currently (under RIPE-MD160 ) there are (2^160) 1,461,501,637,330,902,918,203,684,832,716,283,019,655,932,542,976 potential bitcoin addresses and  around 2^96 private keys whose corresponding public key hashes to that address
The total size of the multiple output transaction must be under 100K bytes or it will not be included in blocks or relayed on the network.
A compressed pubkey p2pkh is 146 bytes and an uncompressed pubkey p2pkh is 178 bytes.
Source: https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/How_to_cheaply_consolidate_coins_to_reduce_miner_fees

A huge bottle necking of transactions would eventually happen which will make this process incredibly inefficient. Again, you are only thinking in terms of btc.

[legendster]

At this point, I have interacted with many experts on the subject and I think I have a clear goal ahead of me.

Step 1 : Create an altcoin / token preferably an erc20 or waves token.  THIS IS NOT THE PHOENIX PROJECT THAT I HAVE ENVISIONED HERE.
Planning to call it SuRaJ Coin
_{Suraj is the hindi word for sun. Seems fitting that the sun will bring the phoenix into existence.}

Step 2 : Plan and implement an incentivized revenue generation system for that token. 100% of SRJ coin's revenue would be used to fund the Phoenix project and create the system that I have talked about so far.

Step 3 : Fully commit to Phoenix Project and get it functional within a reasonable timeframe. Use the revenue from SRJ Coin to pay the team members.

Step 4 : Once the Phoenix project is successfully launched and realized, the revenue generated from SRJ Coin would be redirected to other efforts that may or may not be related to Phoenix project (still undecided about this part)

Holders of SRJ Coin would be incentivized within the Phoenix project. How? I am not sure yet. Details will be revealed as I sketch them up.
I think this is the best and most transparent way of raising the colossal amount of funds required for the Phoenix project. If someone has a better suggestion, please let me know.

[HelloDapp]

I think this is a good idea. Not only would it introduce a new asset, but that asset would help all the others climb in price, due too decreasing supply, while leaving demand at its current state.

[legendster]

If anyone is interested in taking this project seriously then you need to head over to https://discord.gg/kNWzu2K


Seeking some php developers

[charlie137]

the concept is very interesting, but the purpose is questionable. if you looking from the basic physical view - everything makes sense. but why would you encourage users to invest by burning other asset? theres plenty of non-destructive approaches to verify the investment's transition. this looks like a destructive practice due the unwritten standard of a blockchain to have limited supply. the tech (btc) was created to move away from the commercial influence, but sounds like this idea is driven exclusively from the commercial needs. destroying bitcoins for any purpose than securing the network - doesn't sounds right since it has a greed argument. this is regarding limited supply projects

p.s. is there anybody who's not regretting burning their bitcoins?)

[legendster]

the concept is very interesting, but the purpose is questionable. if you looking from the basic physical view - everything makes sense. but why would you encourage users to invest by burning other asset? theres plenty of non-destructive approaches to verify the investment's transition. this looks like a destructive practice due the unwritten standard of a blockchain to have limited supply. the tech (btc) was created to move away from the commercial influence, but sounds like this idea is driven exclusively from the commercial needs. destroying bitcoins for any purpose than securing the network - doesn't sounds right since it has a greed argument. this is regarding limited supply projects

p.s. is there anybody who's not regretting burning their bitcoins?)

I am a student of an economics although I might not have the degree to back up my years of experience in the subject. How I acquired the said experience is a debate for another time. However, the main project's idea is driven by a very practical effect that you can witness in the modern world. Examples of which I will give you further below.
The cryptoverse in it's entirety is a closed system that is built to move money without the confined limits of our existing economy. And if you have read through all the posts then you would find that I am not talking about burning just Bitcoin but any and all cryptocurrencies essentially forming a deflationary system that aims to reduce the amount of available cryptos in the market. Which would only boost the unburnt cryptos that exist in the market afterwards.

Now you may ask why deflation is important?
In that case let me talk about those examples which I cited above. Take Venezuela's economy for instance and their national paper currency Bolivar, the hyperinflation in their economy is so bad that people are literally weighing the paper bills by the kilo to pay for basic everyday goods and services.

A similar incidence of hyperinflation was recorded recently in Zimbawe. Cases of hyperinflation isn't new, the treaty of Versailles in World War I for Germany made them suffer a similar crisis. And even Hungary went through a similar if not more severe economic crunch after World War II.

Now think about it more clearly, in our crypto-verse we cannot stop anyone from creating a new cryptocurrency since there is no regulatory body to put a check in place, however, we can create a deflationary system and we can target any cryptocurrency and take out large amounts of it from the open market from circulation. Not only the circulating supply but the total supply. This would directly help to stabilize the market against the uncontrollable influx of new coins/tokens every month.


In the end, you may say my motivations are fueled by greed. Yes Sir! I am greedy about the fact that I want to do something to help stabilize the crypto economy without the false pretext of creating a "stable coin" pegged by some centralized national currency. I am greedy about the fact that I want to insure people that when they have their investments stuck in a dead or abandoned project, that they can switch over to my system where even if they do not find themselves in profit, at the least they will not find themselves in loss.

You may call this an idealistic project with idealistic goals but I want to stabilize the economy and this "burning system" could be a realistic and practical way to tackle this problem.