Microcash.org says "Solidcoin"

[tacotime]

Some accounts with low amounts of MicroCash will get low amounts or no amounts of the total fees paid back, who is denying that or misleading anyone? Every day every account takes a half cent (0.005) to cover the operational costs, whether the account is rich or poor this fee is taken. These fees are then redistributed back to every account based on how much MicroCash they have.

Nothing is stopping anyone from becoming a MicroCash holder and earning significant amounts of interest, they just have to sell products people will buy, offer services or invest themselves. People who have tiny amounts of MicroCash will pay an account fee just like someone with a lot of MicroCash will. If they increase the amount of MicroCash they have they'll go from paying a tiny fee to actually earning MicroCash, it's a nice reward system where people can escape paying fees.

As to how much reward is given back, it all depends on the total fees collected, which varies day to day. The more people use the network the more fees are collected and the more people are paid. Now users get indirectly paid for spreading the word about MicroCash to their friends and family.

I have kind of a hard time believing that people in your inner circle like Ahimoth would get behind an economic scheme with such a design.

[Syke]

So the more MicroCash you have the higher the percentage of the fees you get. It doesn't necessarily reward early adopters, it rewards people who have MicroCash.

MicroCash: Taking from the poor and giving to the rich.

[k9quaint]

So the more MicroCash you have the higher the percentage of the fees you get. It doesn't necessarily reward early adopters, it rewards people who have MicroCash.

MicroCash: Taking from the poor and giving to the rich.

At this point Microcash is probably just a wrapper for malware. Coinhunter will charge up some stolen credit cards and call it a day.

[pla]

Operational costs are computer capital, memory usage, cpu usage, network usage and disk space usage.

Okay, let me make sure I have this right - As a potential participant in the MicroCash system, I have to pay for my computer capital, memory usage, cpu usage, network usage, and disk space usage - And MicroCash promises to tax me for this, so it can give it to others using the same (or potentially lower, as I'll address in a minute) level of resources but who happen to have a higher MSB set in their account balances?

I sincerely hope I have that very, very wrong, and you've left out something about these taxes funding a built-in exchange, or secure online wallet backups, or hell, even paying 3rd-party dev(s) and auditor(s) to improve and validate the system.

Nearly everyone around the world sets a price for these features (ie it's very difficult to find reliable hosting that is free). Because you can now securely use MicroCash without becoming a node you are essentially relying on the hundreds/thousands of computers around the world to do it for you.

Okay, perhaps you've just touched on our failure to communicate here - How exactly does one use MicroCash without becoming a node?

By putting a fee on this resource we can basically control to some extent the number of useless accounts created (that clog the nodes), prevent and cleanup spam and also now offer small amounts of interest back to the chain proportionally.

The possible account-space for a modern cryptosystem comfortably exceeds the number of atoms in the universe by a factor of more than a google.  Given that they don't count as a scarce resource, that inactive accounts have no effect on either network or storage, and that disposable one-time-use accounts provide one of the bigger selling points of a cryptocurrency - What does this first point matter?

As for "cleanup spam", this tax seems like a bitdust attack built right into the system itself - How does MicroCash plan to get around the resulting problem of massive block fragmentation, and how does causing such fragmentation prevent the ensuing cleanup?  Or does the protocol have a significant enough change from existing BitCoin clones that "dust" no longer presents a problem (and if so, why do we need to pay to avoid it)?

MicroCash can provide a better infrastructure and new services on top of it.

Again, what infrastructure?  We (the users of the currency) provide all the necessary infrastructure, all the end-point computing resources, the entire raison-d'etre for any currency.  I don't see how charging us for our own contributions makes the network in any way "better".

All fees are collected, account and transaction fees, and instead of giving them to the people who are rich in hardware (miners) they give it back to all MicroCash account holders proportionally based on the amount of MicroCash they have.

But on day-1, only the large existing SolidCoin holders will have a balance on which to draw interest; this tax effectively gives them a reason not to spend their MicroCash, as they can continue to receive income without doing anything (including contributing "computer capital, memory usage, cpu usage, network usage and disk space usage" to the network).  They can just log in once and go offline forever, and rake it in over time.  How does that encourage new users of the system, to know that they get to pay a tax to others who can effectively retire on their now-idle "investment" capital?

[Etlase2]

Okay, perhaps you've just touched on our failure to communicate here - How exactly does one use MicroCash without becoming a node?

MC is apparently heavily promoting a lite client. But the funny thing is, you don't get paid for having a full node, you just get paid for having a lot of coins. Since there is not necessarily any future correlation (I will admit there is a current one since like 10 people use SC), you are just getting paid by having coins.

The possible account-space for a modern cryptosystem comfortably exceeds the number of atoms in the universe by a factor of more than a google.  Given that they don't count as a scarce resource, that inactive accounts have no effect on either network or storage, and that disposable one-time-use accounts provide one of the bigger selling points of a cryptocurrency - What does this first point matter?

They are switching to an account ledger rather than a transaction ledger as described in various places around the forums here. RS claimed on his forums that "he just thought it up." This means that accounts use up about 1/4th the space of a bitcoin transaction, and there is only 1 balance per address, so there is a significant reduction in the amount of data required to store any given address. This is somehow reasoning for charging a daily fee (in reality, it allows for the charging of a daily fee, so the RS group decided to take advantage of that).

Again, what infrastructure?  We (the users of the currency) provide all the necessary infrastructure, all the end-point computing resources, the entire raison-d'etre for any currency.  I don't see how charging us for our own contributions makes the network in any way "better".

Yeah I don't follow his logic at all there either.

How does that encourage new users of the system, to know that they get to pay a tax to others who can effectively retire on their now-idle "investment" capital?

God exists because the Bible tells me so.

[Gavin Andresen]

So the more MicroCash you have the higher the percentage of the fees you get. It doesn't necessarily reward early adopters, it rewards people who have MicroCash.

MicroCash: Taking from the poor and giving to the rich.

Interesting.

If I understand correctly, if an address has a greater-than-average amount of currency then it will get interest.

Paid for by all the accounts with a less-than-average amount of currency.

So there's an incentive for everybody to (try to) be above the average. That seems like a recipe for a lot of disappointed people, especially since a graph of size-of-account will have a long tail with of lots of little accounts.

Making a half-thought-out-prediction, I'd say the end result would likely be one big centralized account controlled by the largest exchange with over 50% of the currency in it, because there would be a natural incentive to store your money in the biggest account so you get the most interest...

[Cosbycoin]

So the more MicroCash you have the higher the percentage of the fees you get. It doesn't necessarily reward early adopters, it rewards people who have MicroCash.

MicroCash: Taking from the poor and giving to the rich.

Interesting.

If I understand correctly, if an address has a greater-than-average amount of currency then it will get interest.

Paid for by all the accounts with a less-than-average amount of currency.

So there's an incentive for everybody to (try to) be above the average. That seems like a recipe for a lot of disappointed people, especially since a graph of size-of-account will have a long tail with of lots of little accounts.

Making a half-thought-out-prediction, I'd say the end result would likely be one big centralized account controlled by the largest exchange with over 50% of the currency in it, because there would be a natural incentive to store your money in the biggest account so you get the most interest...

Yeah and thus making this whole principle worthless if everyone puts their MC "investment" into one exchange because then there will be no interest because there will likely be only one account.

LOL 

[Kettenmonster]

Making a half-thought-out-prediction, I'd say the end result would likely be one big centralized account controlled by the largest exchange with over 50% of the currency in it, because there would be a natural incentive to store your money in the biggest account so you get the most interest...

Could be that exchange will stop accepting coins at let´s say 53,67%. Where the 3,67 depends on the size and number of other larger accounts, of cause. ... uhm why? The 3,67 is reducing profit but increasing safety.

The question is basically how many parachutes to grab. Could be it´s wise to take none and stay away from that plane in first place.

[julz]

Every day every account takes a half cent (0.005) to cover the operational costs

So uhh..  physical coins such as the Casascius coins are a no-go for this microcash thing eh?

[Foxpup]

Every day every account takes a half cent (0.005) to cover the operational costs

So uhh..  physical coins such as the Casascius coins are a no-go for this microcash thing eh?

Of course not. You just have to include the date of issue as well as the depreciation rate with the denomination, eg:

ONE MicroCash Dollar
minus 0.5 cents per day since 1 June 2012
This MicroCash Coin will be worthless on 18 December 2012
Spend it quickly!

[julz]

I'm wondering what the hell an 'account' is in the microcash context.
Does this mean one needs to have a defragged wallet with all coins controlled by a single private key in order to stop the smaller inputs from being whittled away to nothing?

Not that bitcoin is ideal for microtransactions  - but so far it sounds like microcash is very microtransaction unfriendly...  and heavily into taxing the poor.

Looks like both the 'micro' and 'cash' parts are misnomers.  wow.. and I thought soiledcoin was as tragically comical as it could get!

[Etlase2]

I'm wondering what the hell an 'account' is in the microcash context.
Does this mean one needs to have a defragged wallet with all coins controlled by a single private key in order to stop the smaller inputs from being whittled away to nothing?

Not that bitcoin is ideal for microtransactions  - but so far it sounds like microcash is very microtransaction unfriendly...  and heavily into taxing the poor.

Looks like both the 'micro' and 'cash' parts are misnomers.  wow.. and I thought soiledcoin was as tragically comical as it could get!

from the SCT board:

Part of MicroCash is accepting micropayments, so we want low transaction fees. A half cent daily account fee is pretty much nothing, especially to anyone who is running a computer and you complaining about it like it's the coming of satan is pretty hilarious.

my response:

"We want you to be able to send micropayments cheaply, so we charge you micropayments daily!"

 The logic astounds.

of course he did not respond to that part

it really is batshit retarded and is just another attempt to get the revenue stream going for RS and his cohorts

the "coin protection fund" has 5% of the total coins in existence (save the trust accounts) so it will be earning the vast majority of this microfee interest on top of it all. and there is no date of when the CPF will end or any direction for it either.

[420]

is microcash coming out?

[smoothie]

is microcash coming out?

It already did. It came out of RealSolid's ass.   

[420]

is microcash coming out?

It already did. It came out of RealSolid's ass.   

I guess for transfers and mining we're awaiting decontamination then