Dollar-Backed Digital Currency Aims to Fix Bitcoin’s Volatility Dilemma

[Kiloday]

I don't like the name "Realcoin". It kind of implies that Bitcoin is "Fakecoin".

[DooMAD]

A Santa Monica-based startup says it has produced the first dollar-backed digital currency.

I made it only to the first sentence before guffawing. Isn't the dollar the first dollar-backed digital currency?

Sometime in the 1980s I was a student intern at the Xerox Palo Alto Research Center (PARC).  Some years before they had developed the Alto, the first usable personal workstation with an ethernet interface, bit-mapped display (instead of the then-standard 25x80 character display), a three-button mouse, and the basic ideas of a GUI -- menus, buttons, sliders, etc.

With much effort, the PARC researchers had managed to convince the upper Xerox management that those weird things could be marketed.  So Xerox started developing commercial versions of the Alto, that were planned to cost 80'000$ or more.

But, before those machines were ready, Apple unexpectedly launched the first Macintosh, which cost only a few thousand dollars and also had a bitmapped display, mouse, and a GUI with buttons, menus etc.  In fact Jobs had seen the Alto and copied those features from it.

As soon as the Macintosh was announced, someone at PARC collected all its TV ads and showed them in the lab's auditorium.  While most of the audience was a bit stunned and worried, there was a small group who laughed at every "weakness" of the Mac: its tiny screen, the mouse with just one button, the lack of a network interface, the floppy disk, and so on.

Needless to say the Xerox workstations were a complete flop, and Xerox had to pull out of the computer market.  And you all know what happened to the Mac.

So, perhaps it is not yet the time to laugh at RealCoin just because it is technically garbage.

Or laugh louder so that we draw attention to the fact that it's technically garbage.  Perhaps if the internet had been a thing in 1980, the word would have spread more easily that the mac was the inferior product and Xerox wouldn't have been relegated to photocopiers, printers and fax machines.  If there's a marketing battle to be won, then we should point out the flaws in our competition where we see them.  And realcoin is definitely flawed.

[JorgeStolfi]

[ Anecdote of Xerox PARC staff laughing at Macintosh in 1985 for its flaws compared to Xerox Star workstations ]
So, perhaps it is not yet the time to laugh at RealCoin just because it is technically garbage.

Or laugh louder so that we draw attention to the fact that it's technically garbage.  Perhaps if the internet had been a thing in 1980, the word would have spread more easily that the mac was the inferior product and Xerox wouldn't have been relegated to photocopiers, printers and fax machines.  If there's a marketing battle to be won, then we should point out the flaws in our competition where we see them.  And realcoin is definitely flawed.

I failed to get the point across, sorry.  The comparison with Apple x Xerox only goes so far.

(Actually Xerox was much bigger than Apple at that time, they had the largest marketing firepower, and they were experts on networking.  (The Ethernet LAN had been invented there, they created the first internet-wide forum, and my boss's boss Bob Taylor at the time had been the director of DARPA in the 1970s when DARPA invented the internet.) And the Xerox workstations were better than the first Macintosh in many respects.  But the Mac was 1/20 of the price, and had Jobs and Wozniak.)

My point is that Brock Pierce is not the typical bitcoin enthusiast or bitcoin entrepreneur or even bitcoin VC investor.  He not only has experience in playing the industry takeover game, but is the kind of guy who changes the rules of the game to suit him.  The mere fact that he bought his way from being an unknown outsider with no businesses in bitcoinland to the helm of the Bitcoin Foundation in a few months should get people on alert.

[CokeCoin]

An inflationary dollar. Good luck with that!
Also, Bitcoin foundation... Do you want to start a war with your community? because this is how you start a war with your community.

[InwardContour]

-snip-

Edit: I think the important part is that realcoin has full backing, which national currencies usually do not have.

Huh?
So you think realcoin is fine because it's backed up by something that is not?

I don't understand the logic in what you said.....

I don't think realcoin is ok, I do not think it will be relevant in two years.

There were some arguments thown back and forth. Compared to a currency like Singapore dollar, that tries to follow a bunch of other currencies in a band, it seems that realcoin in fact can be pegged exactly to the dollar, since it is fully backed. You could also say it is a dollar extension, a warehouse receipt for a dollar stored. So I think it is possible that it can follew the dollar in value closely.

It may work. There is a lot of benefit having dollar version of crypto coin. If they can convince merchant to accept it, and make it easy and secure for smart phone users to buy, the potential is higher than bitcoin as most bitcoin users are hoarding it hoping for higher price rather than using it.

How would the network be secured? Would it be done by a central authority or would it somehow be decentralized?

[Melbustus]

-snip-

Edit: I think the important part is that realcoin has full backing, which national currencies usually do not have.

Huh?
So you think realcoin is fine because it's backed up by something that is not?

I don't understand the logic in what you said.....

I don't think realcoin is ok, I do not think it will be relevant in two years.

There were some arguments thown back and forth. Compared to a currency like Singapore dollar, that tries to follow a bunch of other currencies in a band, it seems that realcoin in fact can be pegged exactly to the dollar, since it is fully backed. You could also say it is a dollar extension, a warehouse receipt for a dollar stored. So I think it is possible that it can follew the dollar in value closely.

It may work. There is a lot of benefit having dollar version of crypto coin. If they can convince merchant to accept it, and make it easy and secure for smart phone users to buy, the potential is higher than bitcoin as most bitcoin users are hoarding it hoping for higher price rather than using it.

"It may work"...until people wise up.

Background Refresher: Electronic money needs a way to keep track of who has spent what. We've had (technically) decent ways to do that using authoritative/centralized entities (PayPal, Square, Banks, etc) for a while. And since 2009, we've had a *decentralized* way to do that: blockchain-based crypto-coins.

RealCoin's Problem: If there's a central organization fixing the value of a crypto-coin, it is by definition NOT decentralized, but the whole point of blockchain-style crypto-coins is still to get *decentralized* global consensus. Thus, the entire concept of a a dollar-backed blockchain makes no sense.

So, the people behind realcoin are one or more of the following:
1) Stupid
2) Exploiting other people's stupidity for profit.

[JorgeStolfi]

So, the people behind realcoin are one or more of the following:
1) Stupid
2) Exploiting other people's stupidity for profit.

Why, (2) of course.  How is that saying, "no one has ever gone broke by underestimating ..."

[jubalix]

Bitcoin’s does not have a Volatility Dilemma

rather most human don't like the uptake curve of btc because it doesn't match their time scale of $10 more each day.

"Volatility" it is actually one of BTC's most powerful bootstrapping features that attracts traders and entrepreneurs, media, and gets it used faster.


the 'volatitliy' myth belongs in the same bin as the LTC on GOX and BTC on AMAZON.

[JorgeStolfi]

Bitcoin’s does not have a Volatility Dilemma
rather most human don't like the uptake curve of btc because it doesn't match their time scale of $10 more each day.
"Volatility" it is actually one of BTC's most powerful bootstrapping features that attracts traders and entrepreneurs, media, and gets it used faster.
the 'volatitliy' myth belongs in the same bin as the LTC on GOX and BTC on AMAZON.

Perhaps you don't know what "volatility" means?

It means that the price of something can change a lot, up or down, unpredictably.  In the case of Bitcoin, sometimes 10% in a matter of hours.

The volatility of bitcoin is a measurable fact, not a myth. It is much larger than that of dollars and euros, or stocks of established companies.  While volatility attracts day traders, it is terrible for its use as currency, or for storing money that you may need some day, or for moving money across national borders.

Realcoin may be a joke technically, not even a true cryptocoin; but if it promises stability, it will have a powerful advantage over bitcoin for use in e-commerce, or for moving money across borders.  (For liquid value storage, neither is any good.) 

Bitcoin would remain the choice for long-term investors who believe that it will appreciate 10x or more eventually. But since its value resides entirely in its demand for e-commerce and such...

[InwardContour]

....
Background Refresher: Electronic money needs a way to keep track of who has spent what. We've had (technically) decent ways to do that using authoritative/centralized entities (PayPal, Square, Banks, etc) for a while. And since 2009, we've had a *decentralized* way to do that: blockchain-based crypto-coins.

RealCoin's Problem: If there's a central organization fixing the value of a crypto-coin, it is by definition NOT decentralized, but the whole point of blockchain-style crypto-coins is still to get *decentralized* global consensus. Thus, the entire concept of a a dollar-backed blockchain makes no sense.
....

It would not have a fixed value, but rather it would have a fixed amount of hard assets (dollars) that back each "coin"

In theory the price of the coins could trade above or below one dollar and would be set by the market

[oXo]

Well.... thanks for the laugh. I think many people fail to understand why BTC and it's plethora of (functional) babies exist. People are trying to leave the fiat system behind, to actually back one with fiat (IMO) actually increases the DCs' volatility and opens new avenues of exploitation. For a currency to have value, it usually needs to be backed by finite resources and in it's self be finite.

To back with  fiat currency means to value it at the entire fiats' value. Which is diluted everyday as the printing presses never stop running.

Unless they introduce some radical means of limiting this, this will be a flash in the pan and doomed to fail. The evry idea of backing with fiat means opening yourself to national regulation, banking regulation and you can be accused of subversion of bankjing systems , so much can go wrong.

So when the usd collapses so will realcoin? Why not just invest in usd and cut out the middleman (realcoin)?

[Mt. Gox]

So when the usd collapses so will realcoin?

Probably.

Why not just invest in usd and cut out the middleman (realcoin)?

I think it is to take advantage of the features of the blockchain. The blockchain removes the need for fee-charging middlemen such as banks, credit card companies (Visa/MasterCard), and payment processors (PayPal). Think of it as USD with a blockchain.

I have no interest in it, but I don't see it as being a terrible idea.

[InwardContour]

Why not just invest in usd and cut out the middleman (realcoin)?

I think it is to take advantage of the features of the blockchain. The blockchain removes the need for fee-charging middlemen such as banks, credit card companies (Visa/MasterCard), and payment processors (PayPal). Think of it as USD with a blockchain.

I have no interest in it, but I don't see it as being a terrible idea.

If you have physical dollars then you would not even need the blockchain (nor would you need to pay miner fees) as you can simply use your dollars to pay for your goods/services in cash.

[Mt. Gox]

Why not just invest in usd and cut out the middleman (realcoin)?

I think it is to take advantage of the features of the blockchain. The blockchain removes the need for fee-charging middlemen such as banks, credit card companies (Visa/MasterCard), and payment processors (PayPal). Think of it as USD with a blockchain.

I have no interest in it, but I don't see it as being a terrible idea.

If you have physical dollars then you would not even need the blockchain (nor would you need to pay miner fees) as you can simply use your dollars to pay for your goods/services in cash.

This is true, but what if you wanted to buy something from another country? Or from an online merchant? Using cash would be impossible in such circumstances. You would have no other choice but to use the banks, credit card companies, and PayPal - and you will get hit with fees along the way.

[InwardContour]

Why not just invest in usd and cut out the middleman (realcoin)?

I think it is to take advantage of the features of the blockchain. The blockchain removes the need for fee-charging middlemen such as banks, credit card companies (Visa/MasterCard), and payment processors (PayPal). Think of it as USD with a blockchain.

I have no interest in it, but I don't see it as being a terrible idea.

If you have physical dollars then you would not even need the blockchain (nor would you need to pay miner fees) as you can simply use your dollars to pay for your goods/services in cash.

This is true, but what if you wanted to buy something from another country? Or from an online merchant? Using cash would be impossible in such circumstances. You would have no other choice but to use the banks, credit card companies, and PayPal - and you will get hit with fees along the way.

This is technically true, however there is a much higher percentage of transactions that are done in ways that cash could be used verses transactions in which it would be impossible for cash to be used (all of your examples)

[moriartybitcoin]

LOL

This sounds like another ABOMINABLE idea from venture-capital darling Brock Pierce.

Seems like Silicon Valley cash is raining on this kid .. I wish he would come up with some better ideas!

[jbreher]

Why not just invest in usd and cut out the middleman (realcoin)?

I think it is to take advantage of the features of the blockchain.

If the price of this so-called 'realcoin' is pegged to the dollar, and the 'realcoin company' issues and redeems them, how can there be any mining reward? If there is no mining reward, what would be the motivation to maintain the blockchain? If the blockchain is not being maintained, how will transactions be validated?

I'm not seeing any mechanism by which 'realcoin' can take advantage of blockchain technology.

[tmbp]

Why not just invest in usd and cut out the middleman (realcoin)?

I think it is to take advantage of the features of the blockchain.

If the price of this so-called 'realcoin' is pegged to the dollar, and the 'realcoin company' issues and redeems them, how can there be any mining reward? If there is no mining reward, what would be the motivation to maintain the blockchain? If the blockchain is not being maintained, how will transactions be validated?

I'm not seeing any mechanism by which 'realcoin' can take advantage of blockchain technology.

What if realcoin issues dollars via blockchain rewards? This would still replace irrefutable math/algorithms with the bitch ass Brock Pierce that could get a period tomorrow and decide he's cutting the rewards in half, would lead to low blockchain security since no reasonable person would be willing to make a serious MHs investment due to the unpredictable nature of the environment/pedophiles.

[minerpumpkin]

Doesn't make any sense. The blockchain exists because decentralized consent is needed for a decentralized currency, i.e. there's no one deciding in the case of an argument. In a centralized environment it would still make transactions public, yeah, but that doesn't have to be specifically a 'blockchain'. If there's a company doing the thing, all the advantages of decentralization are out the window, they also can't do this cheaper than BTC's transaction fees. It's a no-incentive, we could stick to PayPal and Western Union...

[jbreher]

What if realcoin issues dollars via blockchain rewards?

Then they could not 'regulate the supply', which is one of the things they claim is superior about their crap coin.

Edit: fix broken quote markers