The developers of this coin fancy themselves the federal reserve of this cryptocurrency.
Instead of putting our faith in the world banks we should put our faith in some anonymous shmucks on the internet?
Talk about out of the frying pan and into the fire...
Instead of putting our faith in the world banks we should put our faith in some anonymous shmucks on the internet?
Talk about out of the frying pan and into the fire...
I'm right here. Please tell me what you dislike, how you would do it better, and any other questions you have that I can answer. I think calling the development team a "federal reserve" is extremely inaccurate, but I want to know why you made that claim. If you don't like our coin, but want to take the time to make a claim against it, then I hope that you would also take the time to express your opinions in full. Would you mind replying with more details?
-Alexander
I thought it was quite self-explanatory.
As I have been asked to further elaborate in a very professional and mature matter I will gladly oblige.
The basis of this coin (as I understand it) is that the developers will watch the market and if (when) market events start to devalue the currency they will step in and take action to circumvent this.
This is one function of the Federal Reserve or national banks.
You can read more about the Fed and what actions it takes to control inflation here:
http://useconomy.about.com/od/inflationfaq/f/Control_Infla.htm
In a likely scenario, the developers will see the market plummet, and they will use their hefty coffers to start buying up all the low bids to create support and prevent the market from bottoming out.
This will keep the price above a certain level but in no way means there wont be inflation as unlike the fed, the developers of aircoin have a limited budget.
It should be noted at this point the developers investing pool is entirely in Aircoin, to the sum of 2,500,000. In order to counteract large price movements they will need access to bitcoins. So in order to have this "safety-net" they must first sell aircoin. In the short term this would contradict what they hope to achieve as they would be releasing more Aircoin into the market supply (inflation). Once done, they would have a safety net available. I would assume that every time there is a dip in the market they would then need to deplete their bitcoin reserves by buying up the aircoin being dumped. Now using this method they can almost be assured to increase their investing pool because once that support is established the price will have no where to go but up, and they will be able to sell the cheap aircoin they purchased at a profit. This assumes non-repetititve crashes, as obviously their reserves could be depleted if a continued downward trend happened.
So far, this is sound procedure and if trustable could function quite well.
But therein lies the problem.
Time and time again the fed, bankers and politicians have proven that they are not trustable. You can rest easy that at least the fed will not take the nations money reserves and run off with them. They have oversight, regulations and laws.
With Aircoin they have no oversight, no accountability, no laws.
I would like to make the distinction that I am not calling the developers of Aircoin theives or criminals. I am not implying that they have malicious intent.
What I am saying is that Cryptocurrency was developed because we cannot trust humans not to be humans. At times we are weak, greedy and corruptable. Even the most honest man could be turned to crime should the circumstances be right (maybe your wife is dieing and needs a heart transplant but you dont have $1,000,000 to pay for the procedure... what would you do?).
I believe for anyone to put blind faith in anyone else in this community goes against what cryptocurrency stands for.
The developers of Aircoin have an uphill battle to fight.
They have to prove that they are trustworthy but they can only do that by people trusting them blindly and waiting to see if it's true.
My earlier comment was a bit rash (as many are) but the sentiment remains the same.
You have a decentralized currency with a centralized point-of-failure.
We could give any number of scenarios that would be potentially fatal to the currency (loss of investing pool funds due to theft, hack or virus comes to mind).
Maybe you get run over by a bus? To plan for that scenario you must trust another with access to the funds in the event of your death. By trusting another with access to those funds in the event you are immediately killed, you have created another point-of-failure.
The list goes on.
These are issues that are not easily solved.
