Topic: [ANN] AIRcoin - page 91. (Read 137265 times)

I'd like to reemphasize this point. Coins have been experimenting for a while with different block rewards, different ways to structure the block reward (dynamically or not), ways to retarget difficulty (our respect to Kimoto), different fees, different premines, and much more besides. Except for the straight up clones, every coin has approached these questions in different ways. After several years of experimentation and growth, we have a pretty good idea of the right combination of these characteristics that make a coin successful. But the original creators of Bitcoin never could have known the answers to some of these questions; it has taken years of experimentation and iteration to get us to where we are.

With that said, we've studied altcoins to figure out what they've done right and what they've done wrong. And even some of the scams have helped inform the community about the upper limit of inflation that can be sustainable. We take a dim view on that question. After studying the unsustainable increases in supply that the animal coins pioneered, we realized that a moderate increase in supply over time is the single best way to introduce stability into the market. This is a criticism for both animal coins and Bitcoin itself. The animal coins debase their currencies in their impatience. Bitcoin hits its ceiling too soon. To be clear, no one could have reasonably expected the Bitcoin creators to have understood the second order effects of limiting increases in supply over time. Fortunately, with years of hindsight, we do. This is a topic that we will go into depth about in the coming days and weeks.

So even if you completely discount our efforts to increase stability and liquidity for our coin, we still have a damn fine coin. And excitingly, this is an area that we are pioneering. Market making is not new to the stock market. But this is the first time that the development team behind a coin has set out to deliberately and rigorously provide stability and liquidity to a coin after it's already being traded. All of the experimentation over the past few years has been in the code of the coin itself. This is our contribution: a perfection of coin characteristics and an ecosystem of trading services to ensure the success of our coin in the long run.

Yes seriously, I must have this coin haha, the developers are ON TOP OF IT.

Thus, the dev team skills were unleashed

Check to make sure libmemenv.a is actually in leveldb.  If it is, this is most likely a problem with g++.  If it isn't, then you could try re-installing the libleveldb-dev package.

On another note, assuming you have the correct source and you followed instacash's post above:


then

g++: error: /mine/AIRcoin/src/leveldb/libmemenv.a: No such file or directory
make: *** [AIRcoind] Error 1

=> compiles fine

Thanks!

Is:
git clone https://github.com/Allied-Investors-Association/AIRcoin
Correct?
It pulls around 288MB of data while most are just a few MB.



:~/AIRcoin/src# make clean -f makefile.unix USE_UPNP=-
rm -f AIRcoind test_AIRcoin
rm -f obj/*.o
rm -f obj-test/*.o
rm -f obj/*.P
rm -f obj-test/*.P
rm -f obj/build.h
cd leveldb && make clean || true
/bin/sh: 1: ./build_detect_platform: Permission denied
make[1]: Entering directory `/mine/AIRcoin/src/leveldb'
rm -f db_bench leveldbutil arena_test autocompact_test bloom_test c_test cache_test coding_test corruption_test crc32c_test db_test dbformat_test env_test filename_test filter_block_test issue178_test log_test memenv_test skiplist_test table_test version_edit_test version_set_test write_batch_test db_bench_sqlite3 db_bench_tree_db libleveldb.a libleveldb.so libleveldb.so.1 libleveldb.so.1.13 libmemenv.a */*.o */*/*.o ios-x86/*/*.o ios-arm/*/*.o build_config.mk
rm -rf ios-x86/* ios-arm/*
make[1]: Leaving directory `/mine/AIRcoin/src/leveldb'

Apologies for the late reply.  You may want to use (instead):

Couldn't have put it better...

run
make clean -f makefile.unix

Then try again

Wow. I learned more in one post on a bitcoin forum than I did from a college level course on US economic policy. Anyway, this just re-assured why I have felt this coin was a good investment from the start. I am very excited about the future of this coin, and now cannot wait for it to hit a major exchange. Good things are coming with this coin.

I'm trying to compile from source the aircoind
git clone https://github.com/Allied-Investors-Association/AIRcoin
cd AIRcoin/src
make -f makefile.unix USE_UPNP=-

Almost completes then:

obj/txdb.o: In function `bool CLevelDB::Read(char const&, CBigNum&)':
/mine/AIRcoin/src/leveldb.h:94: undefined reference to `leveldb::Status::ToString() const'
collect2: ld returned 1 exit status
make: *** [AIRcoind] Error 1

You never know. 

One of the few coins in recent times if not the only one that doesn't look like its developed by a team of 15 year old nerds.
I will support your effort to bring some sanity to the cryptocoin world. Best of luck

http://air.carbonshark.comPool server running smoothly. Averaging 1.1% load. Approaching 30 Mh/s. Fees still at .5%. Monitoring the traffic for any anomalies.

That's a very simple way of putting it, but yes. However, you do not address the mechanism by which we do this. The majority of this post will explain why, starting with:


This however, is wrong. The Federal Reserve has four mechanisms of inflation and deflation control, none of which AIRcoin utilizes. They are:

1. Interest Rate
2. Purchasing Securities from the US Treasury
3. Reserve Requirement
4. Open Market Operations

Let's break them down:

1. The Federal Reserve loans to banks. AIRcoin does not. These loans to banks carry an interest (also called a Discount) rate, which incentivizes holding money (high interest) or spending/investing it (low interest). AIRcoin does not do this. To counteract inflation, the Federal Reserve raises the interest rate. This makes banks willing to hold on to more money, and not spend it. AIRcoin does nothing of the sort and does not claim control over loans or interest, and there is no third party (banks) between the AIRcoin pool and the users of AIRcoin. Therefore, in regards to the federal interest rate, there is no direct comparison between the Federal Reserve and AIRcoin.

You can actually read their daily interest rate selections on their website: http://www.federalreserve.gov/releases/h15/

2. The Federal reserve can choose to purchase securities (debt) from the US Treasury. This is one half of "printing" money. The treasury trades its debt to the federal reserve, putting funds into the Treasury's control to be spent according to the national budget requirements. In an ideal world, this is used to counteract the demand for withdrawls as people spend their money, and the economy grows.

Through the interest rate and reserve requirement (more below) the Federal reserve puts more money into the economy. In the US, we are not under a condition where this is the case. AIRcoin, because it does not utilize an interest rate, does not purchase debt from a third party, does not engage in this mechanism either.

3. (the other half of "printing money") The Federal Reserve can choose change the reserve requirement ratio for Banks. Banks are required to hold a certain amount of cash on-hand for withdrawls. This is strongly enforced, and is the second half of "printing money". After purchasing securities (debt) from the government, the Federal Reserve can now issue a lower reserve requirement, allowing more loans to be made (and they can also adjust the interest rate appropriately) or a higher one that prevents loans. This is the strongest method of controlling the money supply.

In some ways, this is similar to adjusting the block reward. It is only "1 step away" from directly affecting how much money is allowed to be in circulation, as it still needs to be issued through loans, whereas mining is "0 steps away".

However, the one thing unique to the Bitcoin code is that "printed" money in found blocks are not distributed to the group that created or manages the code, and are not used to purchase or issue debt, instead it is given directly to the miners. This has its down benefits and problems, but is generally is a better alternative that cuts out the "middle men" of the banks required to distribute cash to individuals.

Benefits to the mining system:

a. More evenly distributes the increasing money supply.
b. (in theory) has significantly less cost in intermediary actions (printing, minting, etc.) to generate a larger money supply

Problems:
c. Without intermediary action, there is no true mechanism for reducing inflation other than making the block reward approach 0.
d. Without controlling an interest rate, holding or selling a currency is unpredictable unless a mechanism for debt is employed.
e. Reserve price, or price that miners would minimally sell at, is very low, whereas banks and individuals who withdrawl money maintain a high reserve price in exchanging it (just because the dollar is newly printed doesn't mean it will be sold lower!). This amplifies the effect each individual has on printing a small amount of coins, whereas the Federal reserve has a low effect on inflation spread out over a very large centralzied volume.

One thing of note is as a result of the relatively new phenomena of Quantitative Easing the US Federal Reserve has been purchasing more and more federal reserve securities as an attempt to counteract the financial crisis. This involves buying private debt from financial institutions. Unconventional, indeed.

In concept and final effect, yes, it's like printing less or more money, but in mechanism and strength of effect, it is drastically different and almost incomparable.

4. This is the only, truly, the only way in which the Federal Reserve could be compared to the AIRcoin development team. We do, by definition, engage in open market actions! However, these actions are very, very different. AIRcoin provides liquidity services (closing spreads) and direct investment whereas the Federal Reserve purchases and sell government (and more recently, private) debt.


We actually utilize a moving point-float system similar to that of British National Bank, called the EMF.Now, immediately, you're thinking of George Soros who shorted $10B worth of Sterling in order to profit off of the removal of the Point-float system. It's a common misconception was that his actions caused the removal of the system, but this is not true, he simply profited off of it, and it wasn't the Point-Float system that caused the dropping value: The Sterling had only been introduced 2 years ago into the EMF. Greater economic problems and problems with growth caused the dropping value.

In 1999, the Euro was introduced alongside of ERM II, which is the mechanism currently employed. This is closer to what policy we engage in, but still relatively crude. This means we don't buy and sell "at a whim" but have "trailing" volumes that get stronger and stronger as prices go higher and higher, providing greater and greater resistance for buyers and sellers selling or buying out of the range. It's a little more sophisticated than EMF II in that regards, because we have the option to manage it a little closer on a few exchanges than a business can do to an entire country's worth of trade.

So it's not as if we just "Decide" to move the price up or down or keep in in a range, we provide hands that get stronger and stronger the more you deviate. This prevents shocking the market.


(I'll leave the inflation stuff alone for now, that 's adequately addressed elsewhere in this post)

How to Kill AIRcoin:

As explained below, the amounts of currency not immediately being used are re-invested. If, for example, the 24H volume of currency movement increases by 10% per day (highly unlikely) starting at 36 BTC, then (at our average price) we only need to make 1% (due to leveraging our large volume in investment) to keep up.

Here's the formula:

(A * B * (C ^ D)) - (E * F * (G^D)) = H

A = starting 24H volume
B = % of volume consistently above our range
C = % growth of 24H volume
D = Days growth is maintained
E = Value of our investment volume in AIR
F = Average Price we are trying to maintain
G = % gained per day on our volume

When H > 0, at that day D we run out of volume.

So at a 24H volume of 36 BTC and growing at 10% per day, with 20% of it out of our range, an average maintenance price of .00135, and us only able to get 1% per day, we could then sustain that for:

(36 * .2 * (1.1 ^ D)) - (2500000 * .00135 * (1.01^D)) = 0

Solve for D and you get about 72.05 days, meaning that with those assumptions, after 72 days of pure 10% growth, AIR would have a 24H volume of 45788.2333702 BTC at .00135 on average, which is 339,172,099.039 AIR

In reality, volume growth would be closer to 2-3% per day, and our investment gain would be about 2% per day, and only 10% or less would be outside of our volume. This puts us running out of volume after 701 days with a final volume of 36367799637 BTC per day. Or 1700 times more BTC than would ever exist, or 20 Trillion Dollars (about 25% larger than the entire United States Government GDP in one year) moved per day. Yes. That means that, with realistic assumptions, our coin would have to have more exchange volume in 1 day than the USD has in a year.

And all we have to do is raise the price from .00135 just a tiny bit to rectify that, if it manages to happen.

What does this mean? As long as our "limited" budget grows at an equal or faster rate, leveraged by having a much larger volume, we will always be able to sustain a huge volume of trading. It's about leverage and competing rates.


The aggregate demand incurred during the early stages of exchange is "thinned" at a dividing price, with a portion being sold to low reserve prices (a problem with cryptocurrency I pointed out earlier) with the BTC going to those who have mined the coin and wish to exit it immediately. The other portion (significantly larger) goes to the AIRcoin pool to be grown to return to meet increasing demand.

We do not need a large amount of BTC to regulate the price. The formula for this is the following:

[(A * B) - (A*C)] * D = (E+F) * G^D

A = Volume in 24H
B = % of volume traded over our range and adjusted
C = % of volume traded below our range and adjusted
D = Days of sustained trading
E = Buying power of AIR (in BTC) = Pool proportion in AIR * average exchange rate
F = Buying power of BTC = Pool proportion in bTC
G = Growth of Buying power per day (Pool growth)

In a worst-case scenario, let's assume that there is a constant 20% buying power above a median price of .00135 BTC/AIR, on a daily volume of 36 BTC, and there is NO sell volume outside of our range.

[(36 * .2) - (36*0)] * D = (3375) * 1.01^D

On day 469 is when we just can't keep up anymore with the market making, since the market has been one-sided for over a year and a half. That would, indeed, be quite amazing.

More realistically, there will be a disproportionate amount of demand but also some supply sale. Let's assume there's 10% outside of our volume, changing the formula to:

[(36 * .2) - (A*.1)] * D = (3375) * 1.01^D

Which has no real solution, since as D gets larger, the two equations never cross.

But how much do we have to sell in AIR to be able to start that cycle?

If the liquid volume for our coin is 36 BTC per day, and 20% of it falls outside of our ranges (same extreme % from the previous example) and the amount we buy and the amount we sell is 50/50 then we only need to hold roughly 3.6 BTC and 3.6 BTC worth of AIR in the market. Even if the sell amount is 100% of the amount outside of our range, we only need to hold 7.2 BTC and 0 AIR. If we launch at our current mining opportunity price, that's only 3000 AIR.

Again, highly unlikely that cannot be sustained.


That BTC generated by meeting demand and market making? It doesn't just sit around. We reinvest it to grow enough to keep pace with increasing demand. This means we can not just return to the original price, but return to a higher price. So even those extreme circumstances outlined earlier assume the price can't be increased through this method.

But you do identify the profit proposition: Market Making. If the higher buyer only wants to buy for .001 BTC and the lowest seller wants to sell for .00135, we can put orders at .00101 and .00134 trailing down to .00116. and gain between 2-33% gain on making that sale. This means that not only do people get to move their funds quickly (liquidity) but the amount of buying power increases too, furthering the currency's strength.


I want to emphasize the next quote:


That is why I asked you to post. NO transactions occur without trust. Even in cryptocurrency. Bitcoin users may not know the location, identity, or thoughts of the person they are trading with, but they do have to have faith in any businesses, services, transactions, and the code will all work as intended. If we can't trust eachother, then the only method of conflict resolution is violence.

That being said, we have a very difficult battle. But I think my team is exceedingly well equipped to deal with it.


In the result of failure, as insurmountable as it seems, AIRcoin doesn't technically fail, it simply becomes just another cryptocurrency that doesn't offer market services. If my entire development team were to die overnight, it would still operate with the same support of any other cryptocoin. And that's the beauty of it. That's what makes this whole endeavor unique: Upon absolute failure of our development team, it is still a good cryptocoin with usable code.

Those that refuse to act out of fear are left behind. That is the cost of fear. There is a lot of fear in the cryptocoin community. In my whitepaper I identify a number of problems with the community and the technology's development thus far. The Pirates of Cryptocurrency are afraid, they run and move on fast ships stealing coins and hoarding, away from the prying eyes of the government. I described that in my whitepaper, The Island Nations of Cryptocurrency.

Like with all new technology, fear of contingency failures can only be rectified by faith in development. You need faith in our team and our capabilities. That's why I asked you to respond, so that I may have the opportunity to prove ourselves. If you can't trust us, if you can't believe us, at the very least trust the math behind our ideas: Strength in numbers.

Our conquest is not one against human, but against fear as an idea. That's what we're really doing though, destroying fear. Fear of bitcoin crashes, fear of pumps and dumps, fear of US regulation, fear of financial slavery to large institutions, fear of Massive Investment Banks, and fear of government failure. But that is a large mountain to chip away at. However, one step at a time, my team is scaling it. This post, your post, all previous posts, are just little chips and rocks we've knocked down on our way up. As we climb higher, prove our concepts, the risk of falling will become greater and greater, but hopefully our, as in the collective strength of everyone behind AIRcoin, will grow as well. Not because "strength" makes something more valuable, but because strength in oneself can kill fear.

That doesn't mean that fear isn't healthy, but there is an inordinate amount of it in this market. Enough that it will scare giants into doing something that could ruin this technology's future adoption for decades to come.

If you kill that fear through innovation and success, then you have solved the problem with this technology.

- Alexander

They will get that through other trades, and by walling-off the highs of AIRcoin. Those attempting to pump, will be feeding the walls. (I assume sniper-walls, that will not be seen, but they will ultimately drink-up the pumps value. Same like I do on other alts.)

Been thinking this since the beginning . . . in order to drive up AIR price, you must have a reserve of BTC to be used to purchase AIR

Carbonshark Pool  **** We apologize for the downtime a bit ago, the new firewall took a bit longer than anticipated. Pool is back up and running. We still need more miners. We still have the fee @.5% for now.