[ANN][SLR] SolarCoin | PoW to PoS v. 2.0 | Solar Proof of Generation (§1 = 1MWh)

[daniobg]

Someone is selling ~184 000 solarcoins at ~3000 satoshis in Bittrex  Why dump so low? dafuq 

[1714124529]

1714124529

[1714124529]

1714124529

[1714124529]

1714124529

[1714124529]

1714124529

[1714124529]

1714124529

[vipgelsi]

Any update on the video that has SolarCoin in it that is suppose to be featured at the UN Climate conference 11-30-15?

To my knowledge that was scheduled for filming in Sept. and the reporter backed out at the last minute.

Nick

Bummer.

[altseeker]

Someone is selling ~184 000 solarcoins at ~3000 satoshis in Bittrex  Why dump so low? dafuq 

He's dumping everything for BTC no matter how low it is.

[solarcoiner]

Someone is selling ~184 000 solarcoins at ~3000 satoshis in Bittrex   Why dump so low? dafuq  

He's dumping everything for BTC no matter how low it is.

He's not really dumping, rather pumping if you ask me. A dump is when someone sells into limit buys and makes the price fall... Yes someone is selling a lot of solarcoins but it's not a dump just yet :p

[solarcoiner]

Someone is selling ~184 000 solarcoins at ~3000 satoshis in Bittrex  Why dump so low? dafuq 

Imagine you had over 1 Million SLR? What would you do? I would most definitely sell a few 100k and get a few bitcoins just incase. Because at this point I don't think it's really worth it owning more than 340 000 SLR which is 1% of the coins in circulation

[daniobg]

Imagine you had over 1 Million SLR?

Well there are not many people that have ~1 million SLR. In fact those which have more than 20 000 are ~200 people - a really small number if u ask me. Even if someone has more than 100 000 right now it means that he is an early adopter and he must hold, because he must know the idea of the coin at the first place and that this project is a long term investment. By saying that I mean that those 184 000 solarcoins at bittrex are really a big number in my perspective and are not worth to sell them at that price. If this person wants to PUMP the coin, better to sell a small amounts like 2000 or 5000 with a different price each time going UP rather than putting a wall of 184 000 at 3000 satoshi. For me that doesn't make sense. And if someone wants to buy right now he may not be so convinced since at any point someone with a big wallet may dump 100 000+ just like that. I know that those coins which are in our hands by mining or to say buying right now are a small percent of the all coins ever to exist, but the large wallets imo need to sell only a small amounts every now and then and pumping the price up - not just set a wall whenever they feel like it. Just my opinion.

[solarcoiner]

Imagine you had over 1 Million SLR?

Well there are not many people that have ~1 million SLR. In fact those which have more than 20 000 are ~200 people - a really small number if u ask me. Even if someone has more than 100 000 right now it means that he is an early adopter and he must hold, because he must know the idea of the coin at the first place and that this project is a long term investment. By saying that I mean that those 184 000 solarcoins at bittrex are really a big number in my perspective and are not worth to sell them at that price. If this person wants to PUMP the coin, better to sell a small amounts like 2000 or 5000 with a different price each time going UP rather than putting a wall of 184 000 at 3000 satoshi. For me that doesn't make sense. And if someone wants to buy right now he may not be so convinced since at any point someone with a big wallet may dump 100 000+ just like that. I know that those coins which are in our hands by mining or to say buying right now are a small percent of the all coins ever to exist, but the large wallets imo need to sell only a small amounts every now and then and pumping the price up - not just set a wall whenever they feel like it. Just my opinion.

That's true. Maybe the 1 Million SLR example was exaggerated.
I don't understand what you mean by he must hold? Most large holders like me bought in between 0.00000200 and 0.00000600.
Doest that mean they have to hold? Or would the more responsible move be to sell some at at over 1000% profit and still have some incase it continues rising. I guess whoever has put up this sell wall has a lot more Solarcoins, and has been buying most of the coins below 0.00003000.
And if he really wants to dump he can go ahead and fill my bags  
We also don't know if he wants to dump. It might be a cheap attempt to get more people to place sell orders so that he can buy them all up and cancel his sell order... Either way, I wouldn't worry about a 180k sell wall.

[vipgelsi]

Maybe its big oil 

[daniobg]

I don't understand what you mean by he must hold?

Well what I'm trying to say is - better to sell a small amount of coins every now and then. The only logic behind that wall (I know ~5 BTC cannot be considered wall, but lets call it that way ) is like u said - to make people put an order below it and eventually that guy buying more cheaper. Anyway i'm not that worried either - I just wanted to figure out what is behind his head, but the time will tell I guess

[vipgelsi]

Its a great opportunity to get some solar thats all

[Alao]

Someone is selling ~184 000 solarcoins at ~3000 satoshis in Bittrex   Why dump so low? dafuq  

Imagine you had over 1 Million SLR? What would you do? I would most definitely sell a few 100k and get a few bitcoins just incase. Because at this point I don't think it's really worth it owning more than 340 000 SLR which is 1% of the coins in circulation

If you look on the Bittrex top wallet list there are a number of people that have over 500k. Right now 1 mil is about 10k but you really can't do anything. The volume is so low that you can't unload it. I know a couple of people on this forum have 1mil or more. I would say about half of all the SLR in circulation is in the hands of only about 10 people.

[Buds]

We are creating a series of coins that will be used for various things, including one that will be used as a trade instrument to facilitate the trade of Photovoltaic and ASIC materials and parts, I thought I would share it with people who use a coin that is Solar based. We will also be making things like Medical Technologies/Machines, but the coin will also be focused on a lot of Solar Technologies.

Photovoltaic Sub-Project:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1220483.0

ASIC Development Sub-Project:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1262101.0

And I am going to start using Solar coin because what you guys are doing is accomplished in the course of what we are doing, so we are pretty much doing the same thing. But we will have a few coins that are used for other things, but still similar to how Solar Coin is used.

Japa... I seriously think the 2 links provided above were enough not the other 3 posts of spam that followed. Just my 2 cents though.

[CryptoNick]

Taxes Regarding Cryptocurrency

1. A pro rata stock dividend, where a shareholder receives no actual cash or other property, and retained the same proportionate share of ownership of the corporation as was held prior to the dividend, is not taxable income to the shareholder within the meaning of the Sixteenth Amendment.

2. An income tax imposed by the Revenue Act of 1916 on such dividend is unconstitutional, even where the dividend indirectly represented accrued earnings of the corporation.

"It is manifest that the stock dividend in question cannot be reached by the Income Tax Act and could not, even though Congress expressly declared it to be taxable as income, unless it is in fact income."

"A stock dividend really takes nothing from the property of the corporation, and adds nothing to the interests of the shareholders. Its property is not diminished, and their interests are not increased. . . . The proportional interest of each shareholder remains the same."

The stock dividend in this case was the economic equivalent of a stock split—a transaction in which the corporation multiplies the total number of shares outstanding, but gives the new shares to shareholders in proportion to the number they previously held. For example, if a corporation declares a "two for one" stock split (and distributes no money or other property to any stockholder), a stockholder who held 100 shares at $4 per share will now hold 200 shares with a value of $2 each, which is still $400 in value.

"Brief as it is, it indicates the characteristic and distinguishing attribute of income essential for a correct solution of the present controversy. The government, although basing its argument upon the definition as quoted, placed chief emphasis upon the word "gain," which was extended to include a variety of meanings; while the significance of the next three words was either overlooked or misconceived. "Derived from capital;" "the gain derived from capital," etc. Here, we have the essential matter: not a gain accruing to capital; not a growth or increment of value in the investment; but a gain, a profit, something of exchangeable value, proceeding from the property, severed from the capital, however invested or employed, and coming in, being "derived" -- that is, received or drawn by the recipient (the taxpayer) for his separate use, benefit and disposal -- that is income derived from property. Nothing else answers the description."

"It is in vain to say that enlightened statesmen will be able to adjust these clashing interests, and render them all subservient to the public good. Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm. Nor, in many cases, can such an adjustment be made at all without taking into view indirect and remote considerations, which will rarely prevail over the immediate interest which one party may find in disregarding the rights of another or the good of the whole."

"The fundamental relation of "capital" to "income" has been much discussed by economists, the former being likened to the tree or the land, the latter to the fruit or the crop; the former depicted as a reservoir supplied from springs, the latter as the outlet stream, to be measured by its flow during a period of time. For the present purpose, we require only a clear definition of the term "income," as used in common speech, in order to determine its meaning in the amendment, and, having formed also a correct judgment as to the nature of a stock dividend, we shall find it easy to decide the matter at issue. The government, although basing its argument upon the definition as quoted, placed chief emphasis upon the word "gain," which was extended to include a variety of meanings; while the significance of the next three words was either overlooked or misconceived. "Derived from capital;" "the gain derived from capital," etc. Here, we have the essential matter: not a gain accruing to capital; not a growth or increment of value in the investment; but a gain, a profit, something of exchangeable value, proceeding from the property, severed from the capital, however invested or employed, and coming in, being "derived" -- that is, received or drawn by the recipient (the taxpayer) for his separate use, benefit and disposal -- that is income derived from property. Nothing else answers the description."

"Legal trials are not like elections, to be won through the use of the meeting-hall, the radio, and the newspaper... And the Court has insisted that no one be punished for a crime without 'a charge fairly made and fairly tried in a public tribunal free of prejudice, passion, excitement, and tyrannical power'... The theory of our system is that the conclusions to be reached in a case will be induced only by evidence and argument in open court, and not by any outside influence, whether of private talk or public print... Moreover, the jurors were thrust into the role of celebrities by the judge's failure to insulate them from reporters and photographers... The carnival atmosphere at trial could easily have been avoided."

Crypto currency isn't a Stock. You don't own a part of a corporation and there are no assets of the corporation to consider PnL to derive worth from. The worth of BitCoin is the fact that people buy hardware and pay for power to mine it, other than that it is vapor. What people are willing to pay is the worth but this is deceiving since Manipulation is always going on.

The devs create the coin and people pay to use it, this creates a market. So when you buy a coin it is pure speculation that it is worth anything and the fact that you paid that much made it worth that much. It could go to Nil and you lose everything. The act of buying translates a cost of a good. If the costs were always the same it would only flow through. Nothing gained by either party other than the facilitation of a transaction. One party has to sell their coin at the end to get FIAT. This is the problem. It allows for Profiteers to buy it and manipulate the prices to their advantage. They are taking a risk though if they buy. The funny thing is that people actually have to buy it to use it also which could create a demand. But Why would they buy it? There is no real incentive other than the fact that they could trade it and make money maybe later. But generally they get stuck and may just spend it when it is not worth selling. The Merchant can make money but they have now accepted the risks.

The entire problem relates to the need to get back to FIAT i.e.: cost of goods. I have devised a way to eliminate the need to go back to FIAT. I am working out the details to make it more attractive to merchants who want to participate. This also now creates no need to file a tax statement ever in regards to your ownership or usage of the coin. It is like holding a Coupon from your favorite retailer in hopes that your favorite retailer will get on board. The retailer can write the cost off but also have the ability to cash in for a Solar Panel. The actual transaction is a pass through but grants a discount to the Merchant for the exchange. Solar and FIAT go hand in hand so they are a perfect pairing of Power.

[corather]

Taxes Regarding Cryptocurrency

1. A pro rata stock dividend, where a shareholder receives no actual cash or other property, and retained the same proportionate share of ownership of the corporation as was held prior to the dividend, is not taxable income to the shareholder within the meaning of the Sixteenth Amendment.

2. An income tax imposed by the Revenue Act of 1916 on such dividend is unconstitutional, even where the dividend indirectly represented accrued earnings of the corporation.

"It is manifest that the stock dividend in question cannot be reached by the Income Tax Act and could not, even though Congress expressly declared it to be taxable as income, unless it is in fact income."

"A stock dividend really takes nothing from the property of the corporation, and adds nothing to the interests of the shareholders. Its property is not diminished, and their interests are not increased. . . . The proportional interest of each shareholder remains the same."

The stock dividend in this case was the economic equivalent of a stock split—a transaction in which the corporation multiplies the total number of shares outstanding, but gives the new shares to shareholders in proportion to the number they previously held. For example, if a corporation declares a "two for one" stock split (and distributes no money or other property to any stockholder), a stockholder who held 100 shares at $4 per share will now hold 200 shares with a value of $2 each, which is still $400 in value.

"Brief as it is, it indicates the characteristic and distinguishing attribute of income essential for a correct solution of the present controversy. The government, although basing its argument upon the definition as quoted, placed chief emphasis upon the word "gain," which was extended to include a variety of meanings; while the significance of the next three words was either overlooked or misconceived. "Derived from capital;" "the gain derived from capital," etc. Here, we have the essential matter: not a gain accruing to capital; not a growth or increment of value in the investment; but a gain, a profit, something of exchangeable value, proceeding from the property, severed from the capital, however invested or employed, and coming in, being "derived" -- that is, received or drawn by the recipient (the taxpayer) for his separate use, benefit and disposal -- that is income derived from property. Nothing else answers the description."

"It is in vain to say that enlightened statesmen will be able to adjust these clashing interests, and render them all subservient to the public good. Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm. Nor, in many cases, can such an adjustment be made at all without taking into view indirect and remote considerations, which will rarely prevail over the immediate interest which one party may find in disregarding the rights of another or the good of the whole."

"The fundamental relation of "capital" to "income" has been much discussed by economists, the former being likened to the tree or the land, the latter to the fruit or the crop; the former depicted as a reservoir supplied from springs, the latter as the outlet stream, to be measured by its flow during a period of time. For the present purpose, we require only a clear definition of the term "income," as used in common speech, in order to determine its meaning in the amendment, and, having formed also a correct judgment as to the nature of a stock dividend, we shall find it easy to decide the matter at issue. The government, although basing its argument upon the definition as quoted, placed chief emphasis upon the word "gain," which was extended to include a variety of meanings; while the significance of the next three words was either overlooked or misconceived. "Derived from capital;" "the gain derived from capital," etc. Here, we have the essential matter: not a gain accruing to capital; not a growth or increment of value in the investment; but a gain, a profit, something of exchangeable value, proceeding from the property, severed from the capital, however invested or employed, and coming in, being "derived" -- that is, received or drawn by the recipient (the taxpayer) for his separate use, benefit and disposal -- that is income derived from property. Nothing else answers the description."

"Legal trials are not like elections, to be won through the use of the meeting-hall, the radio, and the newspaper... And the Court has insisted that no one be punished for a crime without 'a charge fairly made and fairly tried in a public tribunal free of prejudice, passion, excitement, and tyrannical power'... The theory of our system is that the conclusions to be reached in a case will be induced only by evidence and argument in open court, and not by any outside influence, whether of private talk or public print... Moreover, the jurors were thrust into the role of celebrities by the judge's failure to insulate them from reporters and photographers... The carnival atmosphere at trial could easily have been avoided."

Crypto currency isn't a Stock. You don't own a part of a corporation and there are no assets of the corporation to consider PnL to derive worth from. The worth of BitCoin is the fact that people buy hardware and pay for power to mine it, other than that it is vapor. What people are willing to pay is the worth but this is deceiving since Manipulation is always going on.

The devs create the coin and people pay to use it, this creates a market. So when you buy a coin it is pure speculation that it is worth anything and the fact that you paid that much made it worth that much. It could go to Nil and you lose everything. The act of buying translates a cost of a good. If the costs were always the same it would only flow through. Nothing gained by either party other than the facilitation of a transaction. One party has to sell their coin at the end to get FIAT. This is the problem. It allows for Profiteers to buy it and manipulate the prices to their advantage. They are taking a risk though if they buy. The funny thing is that people actually have to buy it to use it also which could create a demand. But Why would they buy it? There is no real incentive other than the fact that they could trade it and make money maybe later. But generally they get stuck and may just spend it when it is not worth selling. The Merchant can make money but they have now accepted the risks.

The entire problem relates to the need to get back to FIAT i.e.: cost of goods. I have devised a way to eliminate the need to go back to FIAT. I am working out the details to make it more attractive to merchants who want to participate. This also now creates no need to file a tax statement ever in regards to your ownership or usage of the coin. It is like holding a Coupon from your favorite retailer in hopes that your favorite retailer will get on board. The retailer can write the cost off but also have the ability to cash in for a Solar Panel. The actual transaction is a pass through but grants a discount to the Merchant for the exchange. Solar and FIAT go hand in hand so they are a perfect pairing of Power.

I think much of the fiat issue can be addressed when merchants accept slr for goods and services, if they can apply even a small discount, that would help provide the necessary spread for market buys for trade.

[CryptoNick]

Taxes Regarding Cryptocurrency

1. A pro rata stock dividend, where a shareholder receives no actual cash or other property, and retained the same proportionate share of ownership of the corporation as was held prior to the dividend, is not taxable income to the shareholder within the meaning of the Sixteenth Amendment.

2. An income tax imposed by the Revenue Act of 1916 on such dividend is unconstitutional, even where the dividend indirectly represented accrued earnings of the corporation.

"It is manifest that the stock dividend in question cannot be reached by the Income Tax Act and could not, even though Congress expressly declared it to be taxable as income, unless it is in fact income."

"A stock dividend really takes nothing from the property of the corporation, and adds nothing to the interests of the shareholders. Its property is not diminished, and their interests are not increased. . . . The proportional interest of each shareholder remains the same."

The stock dividend in this case was the economic equivalent of a stock split—a transaction in which the corporation multiplies the total number of shares outstanding, but gives the new shares to shareholders in proportion to the number they previously held. For example, if a corporation declares a "two for one" stock split (and distributes no money or other property to any stockholder), a stockholder who held 100 shares at $4 per share will now hold 200 shares with a value of $2 each, which is still $400 in value.

"Brief as it is, it indicates the characteristic and distinguishing attribute of income essential for a correct solution of the present controversy. The government, although basing its argument upon the definition as quoted, placed chief emphasis upon the word "gain," which was extended to include a variety of meanings; while the significance of the next three words was either overlooked or misconceived. "Derived from capital;" "the gain derived from capital," etc. Here, we have the essential matter: not a gain accruing to capital; not a growth or increment of value in the investment; but a gain, a profit, something of exchangeable value, proceeding from the property, severed from the capital, however invested or employed, and coming in, being "derived" -- that is, received or drawn by the recipient (the taxpayer) for his separate use, benefit and disposal -- that is income derived from property. Nothing else answers the description."

"It is in vain to say that enlightened statesmen will be able to adjust these clashing interests, and render them all subservient to the public good. Enlightened statesmen will not always be at the helm. Nor, in many cases, can such an adjustment be made at all without taking into view indirect and remote considerations, which will rarely prevail over the immediate interest which one party may find in disregarding the rights of another or the good of the whole."

"The fundamental relation of "capital" to "income" has been much discussed by economists, the former being likened to the tree or the land, the latter to the fruit or the crop; the former depicted as a reservoir supplied from springs, the latter as the outlet stream, to be measured by its flow during a period of time. For the present purpose, we require only a clear definition of the term "income," as used in common speech, in order to determine its meaning in the amendment, and, having formed also a correct judgment as to the nature of a stock dividend, we shall find it easy to decide the matter at issue. The government, although basing its argument upon the definition as quoted, placed chief emphasis upon the word "gain," which was extended to include a variety of meanings; while the significance of the next three words was either overlooked or misconceived. "Derived from capital;" "the gain derived from capital," etc. Here, we have the essential matter: not a gain accruing to capital; not a growth or increment of value in the investment; but a gain, a profit, something of exchangeable value, proceeding from the property, severed from the capital, however invested or employed, and coming in, being "derived" -- that is, received or drawn by the recipient (the taxpayer) for his separate use, benefit and disposal -- that is income derived from property. Nothing else answers the description."

"Legal trials are not like elections, to be won through the use of the meeting-hall, the radio, and the newspaper... And the Court has insisted that no one be punished for a crime without 'a charge fairly made and fairly tried in a public tribunal free of prejudice, passion, excitement, and tyrannical power'... The theory of our system is that the conclusions to be reached in a case will be induced only by evidence and argument in open court, and not by any outside influence, whether of private talk or public print... Moreover, the jurors were thrust into the role of celebrities by the judge's failure to insulate them from reporters and photographers... The carnival atmosphere at trial could easily have been avoided."

Crypto currency isn't a Stock. You don't own a part of a corporation and there are no assets of the corporation to consider PnL to derive worth from. The worth of BitCoin is the fact that people buy hardware and pay for power to mine it, other than that it is vapor. What people are willing to pay is the worth but this is deceiving since Manipulation is always going on.

The devs create the coin and people pay to use it, this creates a market. So when you buy a coin it is pure speculation that it is worth anything and the fact that you paid that much made it worth that much. It could go to Nil and you lose everything. The act of buying translates a cost of a good. If the costs were always the same it would only flow through. Nothing gained by either party other than the facilitation of a transaction. One party has to sell their coin at the end to get FIAT. This is the problem. It allows for Profiteers to buy it and manipulate the prices to their advantage. They are taking a risk though if they buy. The funny thing is that people actually have to buy it to use it also which could create a demand. But Why would they buy it? There is no real incentive other than the fact that they could trade it and make money maybe later. But generally they get stuck and may just spend it when it is not worth selling. The Merchant can make money but they have now accepted the risks.

The entire problem relates to the need to get back to FIAT i.e.: cost of goods. I have devised a way to eliminate the need to go back to FIAT. I am working out the details to make it more attractive to merchants who want to participate. This also now creates no need to file a tax statement ever in regards to your ownership or usage of the coin. It is like holding a Coupon from your favorite retailer in hopes that your favorite retailer will get on board. The retailer can write the cost off but also have the ability to cash in for a Solar Panel. The actual transaction is a pass through but grants a discount to the Merchant for the exchange. Solar and FIAT go hand in hand so they are a perfect pairing of Power.

I think much of the fiat issue can be addressed when merchants accept slr for goods and services, if they can apply even a small discount, that would help provide the necessary spread for market buys for trade.

Not really, since there must be buys first or a buffer to offer a discount, and profiteers want to buy low. So most of the activity is the Merchants Selling to low buys. Then Pegged to BitCoin there is this variable always spinning the Crypto world in a tizzy.

If a Merchant accepts SLR for something they paid FIAT for they must get Liquidity with urgency since they could lose just by holding, but they could win too by holding if there are buyers not sellers. When we combine a Claimer selling out on top of this, there is only room at the bottom. Since you would not take your FIAT and go buy SLR to just go buy a good or service. So all we have are sellers. It is impossible to sustain the economy this way. Top that off with Exchanges and Fees along with Regulations and Taxation and market manipulation, it goes on and on. The buyers have to bear the brunt of this action just to "GET" something that they can already "GET" with their FIAT. It is like the Crypto world created the greatest concept only to be thwarted by FIAT as the participants valuation of FIAT over the actual Crypto currency. The only people really getting rich are the early adopters and coin creators. You can see it repeat over and over with alts.

This is why SLR and FIAT must be used hand in hand. I am working out the real power play and hope to solidify the concept soon.

[vipgelsi]

https://www.indiegogo.com/

Maybe we should get Solarcoin on here not only would it raise awareness but also raise $ for the cause.

[mattwj44]

This coin doesn't care about merchants, fiat, or any of that stuff.. in fact that doesn't matter at all since this network has the inherent value of representing the power needed to claim each coin.... this value is why we won't need to cater SLR to anyone specifically as that would only narrow or hinder the ambiguity & potential it offers when representing power in the global economy.


I get that people want this coin to be "spendable" but that will happen as it gains network effect & popularity no matter what. We don't need to change/peg anything about this coin other than the claimant rule (1MWH=1SLR), just get the claimant sign-up process online and make it quick to join then watch this coin (or some crypto that adopts similar ideology) take off... also a good wallet & regulation against false-power (double spending) are needed to ensure long term stability.  


Solar power itself is valuable & a coin that truthfully represents it's presence in our global economy can be valued, traded, spent without all this stuff people are trying to propose since speculation on the value of solar power is the end-game here.  

Don't design this coin for merchants, governments, or any other specific 'institution' except one that is comprised of individual people in a free market collecting power to run their lives... Keep it simple

=====

Also early adopters & coin creators should make money as long as there is no pre-mine (this coin had none), thats how investment with high risk works in a free market.     duh  

[CryptoNick]

This coin doesn't care about merchants, fiat, or any of that stuff.. in fact that doesn't matter at all since this network has the inherent value of representing the power needed to claim each coin.... this value is why we won't need to cater SLR to anyone specifically as that would only narrow or hinder the ambiguity & potential it offers when representing power in the global economy.


I get that people want this coin to be "spendable" but that will happen as it gains network effect & popularity no matter what. We don't need to change/peg anything about this coin other than the claimant rule (1MWH=1SLR), just get the claimant sign-up process online and make it quick to join then watch this coin (or some crypto that adopts similar ideology) take off... also a good wallet & regulation against false-power (double spending) are needed to ensure long term stability.  


Solar power itself is valuable & a coin that truthfully represents it's presence in our global economy can be valued, traded, spent without all this stuff people are trying to propose since speculation on the value of solar power is the end-game here.  

Don't design this coin for merchants, governments, or any other specific 'institution' except one that is comprised of individual people in a free market collecting power to run their lives... Keep it simple

=====

Also early adopters & coin creators should make money as long as there is no pre-mine (this coin had none), thats how investment with high risk works in a free market.     duh  

There were 98 Billion Pre-Mined Doh! But they are reserved yeah ok. Again to my point 98 Billion are free and granted to give away (SELLERS not BUYERS). So the claimers should just hold them and not spend them and then we can just say they are valuable because it relates 1MWH to Solar? Solar Power is only valuable since it produces FIAT from the power company and can power your lights, the coin associated is just sold to give those Solar Users an SREC type of benefit, so now who is buying and why? People like mattwj44 must be buying the Claimers coin hoping to get rich. Why spend your FIAT to just hold SLR? Even if there is something to buy why buy SLR just to go buy something that you can already buy with FIAT? If you don't see this then you have blinded yourself.

The only way to accomplish a buy is to force Claimers to spend some of their FIAT that they gained from their Solar Panels in order to claim. Participation should have a cost. If there is a network later and it includes every crypto user or millions of people then you only have profiteers waiting to support your economy by profiting from the merchant sales exchange to FIAT (if you have Merchants otherwise just Trade I guess). There is no other reason to buy at this point if you don't follow my rules of participation. The only reason to buy is to Profit, this means buy low sell high, but who is buying other than profiteers? They will have no one to sell to HIGH unless they pump it while holding astronomical amounts of SLR. Since they would own it they sell it to themselves to boost the price, but then they are stuck since the model is SELL HIGH buy LOW and no other profiteers want to buy their coin from them. This is why the Pump n Dump model only works well once since Devs own the coin for free or minimal cost of hashing it at large block payouts.

[mattwj44]

This coin doesn't care about merchants, fiat, or any of that stuff.. in fact that doesn't matter at all since this network has the inherent value of representing the power needed to claim each coin.... this value is why we won't need to cater SLR to anyone specifically as that would only narrow or hinder the ambiguity & potential it offers when representing power in the global economy.


I get that people want this coin to be "spendable" but that will happen as it gains network effect & popularity no matter what. We don't need to change/peg anything about this coin other than the claimant rule (1MWH=1SLR), just get the claimant sign-up process online and make it quick to join then watch this coin (or some crypto that adopts similar ideology) take off... also a good wallet & regulation against false-power (double spending) are needed to ensure long term stability.  


Solar power itself is valuable & a coin that truthfully represents it's presence in our global economy can be valued, traded, spent without all this stuff people are trying to propose since speculation on the value of solar power is the end-game here.  

Don't design this coin for merchants, governments, or any other specific 'institution' except one that is comprised of individual people in a free market collecting power to run their lives... Keep it simple

=====

Also early adopters & coin creators should make money as long as there is no pre-mine (this coin had none), thats how investment with high risk works in a free market.     duh  

There were 98 Billion Pre-Mined Doh! But they are reserved yeah ok. Again to my point 98 Billion are free and granted to give away (SELLERS not BUYERS). So the claimers should just hold them and not spend them and then we can just say they are valuable because it relates 1MWH to Solar? Solar Power is only valuable since it produces FIAT from the power company and can power your lights, the coin associated is just sold to give those Solar Users an SREC type of benefit, so now who is buying and why? People like mattwj44 must be buying the Claimers coin hoping to get rich. Why spend your FIAT to just hold SLR? Even if there is something to buy why buy SLR just to go buy something that you can already buy with FIAT? If you don't see this then you have blinded yourself.

The only way to accomplish a buy is to force Claimers to spend some of their FIAT that they gained from their Solar Panels in order to claim. Participation should have a cost. If there is a network later and it includes every crypto user or millions of people then you only have profiteers waiting to support your economy by profiting from the merchant sales exchange to FIAT (if you have Merchants otherwise just Trade I guess). There is no other reason to buy at this point if you don't follow my rules of participation. The only reason to buy is to Profit, this means buy low sell high, but who is buying other than profiteers? They will have no one to sell to HIGH unless they pump it while holding astronomical amounts of SLR. Since they would own it they sell it to themselves to boost the price, but then they are stuck since the model is SELL HIGH buy LOW and no other profiteers want to buy their coin from them. This is why the Pump n Dump model only works well once since Devs own the coin for free or minimal cost of hashing it at large block payouts.

What? Lol when tons of people are given something it becomes valuable because they can trade it and because they say it has value.... Also solar energy is valuable BY ITSELF because that energy was put to work in reality, not just sold for fiat.  This is like an airline mile system on steroids, but SO much more.

People like CryptoNick are narrow minded and think this coin has to be tied or justified by fiat or meet some 'standard of value' when it already has by proving work of energy capture from a renewable resource.   

Also hell yea I wanna get rich off this, who doesn't want their investments to make them money?    Liars?   

[roadhog]

Hi im new to this
can this coin be solo mined.
allso i have 9.2kw of solor panels do i get free coins.
cheers all