|
BTCIndia
|
 |
August 07, 2014, 07:16:29 AM |
|
Very interesting!
|
He's Nick Sazbo from Washington. I've my answer. Or Hal? :O
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"Governments are good at cutting off the heads of a centrally
controlled
networks like Napster, but pure P2P networks like Gnutella and Tor seem
to be holding their own." -- Satoshi
|
|
|
Advertised sites are not endorsed by the Bitcoin Forum. They may be unsafe, untrustworthy, or illegal in your jurisdiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
true-asset
|
|
August 09, 2014, 07:58:16 AM |
|
Mr Ferdinando M. Ametrano Around the same time that you released the first draft of this paper, we launched URO, a long term currency pegged to urea (1 URO == 1 metric tonne of urea). Urea is a commodity that predominately costs energy to produce, and is consistently demanded by global food production as the most used fertilizer. We would be most gracious if you could comment on your thoughts regarding the economics of URO. Here are some links: Official Website: http://uro.ioBlog of Forum Discussion Highlights: http://urofoundation.wordpress.comProject Management Platform: http://launchpad.net/uroPrevious Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=600639.0Current Thread: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=684972.0Regards Bohan Huang Currency Development Officer Uro Foundation |
Uro: A Real Long Term Currency, 1 URO = 1 metric tonne of Urea N46 fertilizer[/url]
Urea N46 tracks gradual increases in energy and food prices over the long term.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nando1970 (OP)
Newbie
 Offline
Activity: 13
Merit: 0
|
|
August 20, 2014, 04:19:01 PM |
|
It is not clear to me how URO is effectively pegged to Urea, and I'm not a fertilizer market expert. Anyway I think this point should be clarified, possibly in a proper forum, not here.
Also it is not clear to me the relationship with my paper: I am not personally a supporter of asset backed currencies, as I am more favorable to controlling supply of the quantity of money instead.
About the "scam or not" debate: time will tell, in the meantime everybody deserves credit until proven guilty.
In any case: never buy something you do not understand, hopefully main adopters will be farmers and players in the fertilizer market. Caveat emptor.
Usual disclaimer applies
|
|
|
|
|
|
Chang Hum
|
|
August 20, 2014, 06:17:24 PM |
|
It is not clear to me how URO is effectively pegged to Urea, and I'm not a fertilizer market expert. Anyway I think this point should be clarified, possibly in a proper forum, not here.
Also it is not clear to me the relationship with my paper: I am not personally a supporter of asset backed currencies, as I am more favorable to controlling supply of the quantity of money instead.
About the "scam or not" debate: time will tell, in the meantime everybody deserves credit until proven guilty.
In any case: never buy something you do not understand, hopefully main adopters will be farmers and players in the fertilizer market. Caveat emptor.
Usual disclaimer applies
Quotes have been taken from your synopsis in the uro whitepaper http://uro.io/uro_whitepaper_agriculture_focused_v1.pdf , was probably just a misunderstanding from not bothering to read the actual paper. 5. Economics: URO as a Commodity Market Utility
While UROs are primarily used as a functional utility in the urea market, its roots lie in
currency technology. Recent economics research suggests that commodity pegging can be an
effective mode of currency value stabilisation or “adjustment”, and it is my assertion that
URO, can achieve such stabilization by adopting a similar pegging strategy:
The adjustment is based on a commodity price index determined with a resilient consensus process that
does not rely on central third party authorities. It is posited in this paper that a digital cryptocurrency
adopting elastic monetary standard is Hayek Money, so named from the Nobel Prize-winning
economist: possibly the best money ever devised, a good money standard providing stable prices for a
new economic era [viii]
The ethos of URO is consistent with Hayek’s notion of concurrent and competing
denationalized currencies in that it attempts to form a free market supply/demand stabilisation
of urea prices that in turn reduces the magnitude of fluctuations in urea prices for the entire
economy – even those not adopting URO. Moreover, it aims to achieve this stabilization
through providing greater efficiency and reliability to existing payment and distribution
methods for urea, a competitive advancement achieved through market innovation by
technological means, which will lead to wider international adoption as a mode of
transaction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
montello
|
|
August 20, 2014, 06:59:54 PM |
|
I have downloaded this and i will read it later and keep you posted on my own perception about this.
|
|
|
|
|
giveBTCpls
|
|
August 23, 2014, 10:40:02 AM |
|
Bitcoin will never be stable until around 2050, you are delusional if you think otherwise. Until then we are only going UP and we will see big up and down trends, thats that.
|
|
|
|
|
Dps23
|
|
August 23, 2014, 02:17:32 PM |
|
I agree this is definitely true |
|
|
|
|
|
ulhaq
|
|
December 04, 2017, 06:22:56 AM |
|
In the meantime here's my revised thoughts about volatility.
Even Hayek Money, the best money ever devised, is powerless at eradicating the volatility of the value of money: volatility is an intrinsic property of demand dynamics. The variation of demand over time cannot be artificially governed: nobody can alter this matter of fact and oppose the resulting change in value. Rebasing the monetary stock supply can absorb the volatility impact of variable demand, steering its instability effect away from prices and toward wallet amounts instead. The relevance of such elastic supply of money should not be underestimated, as it will trigger a virtuous loop for volatility too: as long as the currency keeps constant value, a sudden large variation of its demand will become unlikely. Moreover, the availability of stable prices will surely help the growth of the economy using that given money, providing a further benefit in terms of a reduction of the demand/supply variability. In the case of cryptocurrencies the noise due to the variable adoption rate and the need to resort to fiat currencies will be progressively reduced. The only remaining volatility contribution would then just be the variability of the cryptocurrency adoption rate, and this is exactly what is sterilized by Hayek Money through elastic supply of money.
How is it that Hayek money does not have stable purchasing power? If the unit is pegged on a basket of goods, eg, and changes in the demand for the unit causes a rebasement, such that it still purchases the same goods, then there is no change in purchasing power? |
|
|
|
|
|
