You can snapshot BTT right now and used the snapshot, not some future changed version.
How to prove that the snapshot is real? What if one of the chosen ones deletes all his posts on BTT after the distribution?
Topic: Best way of initial coin distribution - page 3. (Read 5230 times)
How to prove that the snapshot is real? What if one of the chosen ones deletes all his posts on BTT after the distribution?
No, I am right.
Ok. But I need a cryptographic proof. Distribution based on records of a website that can change its internal records can't be proved.
You can snapshot BTT right now and used the snapshot, not some future changed version.
When NEM launched Utopian Future said if anybody goes through the trouble of creating a sock puppet deserves the extra coin. That was bull $&!#. But anybody that makes 3000 comments or spends $1000 to get a hero account does deserve the extra coin.
Computer hardware is not a resource that is hard to come by for techies on BTT. But hero accounts are a resource that is hard to come by especially if people know that they are worth extra coin of your next project. The moment you start sending out those emails is the moment that the price of a hero account just went up.
Computer hardware is not a resource that is hard to come by for techies on BTT. But hero accounts are a resource that is hard to come by especially if people know that they are worth extra coin of your next project. The moment you start sending out those emails is the moment that the price of a hero account just went up.
No, I am right.
Ok. But I need a cryptographic proof. Distribution based on records of a website that can change its internal records can't be proved.
This proof of comments and is much harder to game than other systems. Somebody simply can't have a lot of sock puppets each with thousands of posts.
You are wrong. BTT is known for its market of Hero Member accounts.
No, I am right.
Sure there will be a few sock puppets, but there won't be any cases of 1 person is getting 5%.
To buy a BTT sock puppet isn't cheap. A person would be much better off just waiting for the inevitable dump after launch. We are talking about hundreds of people getting free coins for just responding to an email. There will be a big dump and anybody that is tricky enough to buy a hero account would be smart enough to know it would be much cheaper to just buy coins at launch.
To make a system where people can mine coins with CPU's is much easier gamed. I have 5 cpu's of i3 or higher at my disposal right now with 0% extra effort, but if I wanted to obtain 5 hero accounts just to get some of your free coins, that would be quite a task and an expensive one.
Proof of comments are are proof of work.
So, this whole thread was just a pump for MS on NXT?
No.
This proof of comments and is much harder to game than other systems. Somebody simply can't have a lot of sock puppets each with thousands of posts.
You are wrong. BTT is known for its market of Hero Member accounts.
After reading the suggestions I came to such a method:
1. Create a mintable Nxt subcurrency and let people mint as many coins as they can within 24 hours.
2. Create a special Bitcoin address and let those who took part in the previous step send several satoshis to back every minted coin.
These two simple steps solve sockpuppet issue (because resource testing is used), greatly reduce number of script kiddies (or school network admins) with botnets (because minted coins must be backed by bitcoins) and reduce advantage of being a Bitcoin early adopter (because minting requires a lot of GPUs and ASICs can't be used for that).
1. Create a mintable Nxt subcurrency and let people mint as many coins as they can within 24 hours.
2. Create a special Bitcoin address and let those who took part in the previous step send several satoshis to back every minted coin.
These two simple steps solve sockpuppet issue (because resource testing is used), greatly reduce number of script kiddies (or school network admins) with botnets (because minted coins must be backed by bitcoins) and reduce advantage of being a Bitcoin early adopter (because minting requires a lot of GPUs and ASICs can't be used for that).
So, this whole thread was just a pump for MS on NXT? Go fishing by asking people what is the best way to distribute and then tell them.... "I found the answer, it is NXT!" Bull $&!#.
I was thinking that what you really want is as LARGE an initial user base as possible.
I don't need too many users. 1000 is max.
If you want 1000 people that aren't socks, then get a script and start sending out invites to all BTT members with the most posts. Person with the most posts get the first invite, person with the second most gets the second invite. Do batches of 50 or 100 every so often. When 1,000 people have responded to you, stop spamming.
This proof of comments and is much harder to game than other systems. Somebody simply can't have a lot of sock puppets each with thousands of posts.
I don't think there really is a reasonable way to have a 100% proof-of-stake coin that's that way from the very beginning.
Actually, this is not about a coin, it was just an analogy.
See, I'm of the opinion that the "fast distribution" thing is lame, and ultimately leads to the collapse of the cryptocurrencies that do it.
If the creation of coins in the beginning is more per block than, say, one and a half times what it is a year into the issue, you're doing it too fast. In fact the economics would make more sense if the distribution per block a year out was slightly *more* than the distribution in the first few blocks, giving a very mild constant but permanent rate of currency supply inflation.
I think a lot of these altcoins fail because the distribution is way too fast and way too front-loaded. The resulting economic model whether for use as an investment or a currency is just plain broken.
The only sensible way to interpret a coin where the early miners/early investors get way more than anybody else is as a ponzi game where the early investors are looking to make money on fools who come along later or hold on for longer. The point is that Ponzis always collapse, and any sensible person can see that it's going to collapse (even if most of them can't figure out exactly when) so keeping it as an investment is just plain dumb and using it for spending money is a continual search for the greater fool who will accept it believing that the collapse is just a little further out than you believe it is.
If you want to be making a cryptocurrency that makes any kind of economic sense as a currency, the rate of currency creation a year out ought to be about the same, give or take up to 20% depending on what kind of economic model you're looking for, as the rate of currency creation on the first day. Let the rate at which new coins enter the economy remain fairly constant as you make the shift from PoW to PoS, and make that shift gradually and carefully.
If the creation of coins in the beginning is more per block than, say, one and a half times what it is a year into the issue, you're doing it too fast. In fact the economics would make more sense if the distribution per block a year out was slightly *more* than the distribution in the first few blocks, giving a very mild constant but permanent rate of currency supply inflation.
I think a lot of these altcoins fail because the distribution is way too fast and way too front-loaded. The resulting economic model whether for use as an investment or a currency is just plain broken.
The only sensible way to interpret a coin where the early miners/early investors get way more than anybody else is as a ponzi game where the early investors are looking to make money on fools who come along later or hold on for longer. The point is that Ponzis always collapse, and any sensible person can see that it's going to collapse (even if most of them can't figure out exactly when) so keeping it as an investment is just plain dumb and using it for spending money is a continual search for the greater fool who will accept it believing that the collapse is just a little further out than you believe it is.
If you want to be making a cryptocurrency that makes any kind of economic sense as a currency, the rate of currency creation a year out ought to be about the same, give or take up to 20% depending on what kind of economic model you're looking for, as the rate of currency creation on the first day. Let the rate at which new coins enter the economy remain fairly constant as you make the shift from PoW to PoS, and make that shift gradually and carefully.
I don't think there really is a reasonable way to have a 100% proof-of-stake coin that's that way from the very beginning.
I've been considering it recently, actually; I think the best I can do is to make a coin with a fixed proof-of-work award that never changes, and then inflation in the form of "interest" awarded for destroyed coin-blocks (coin-days times actual blocks-per-day) in transactions.
So, I'd start off awarding 10 coins per block, or whatever, and keep doing that indefinitely (you might prefer to stop after a couple of years) - and whenever somebody makes a transaction, the miner gets a month's worth of interest and they get the rest for proof-of-stake.
And the "longest chain" is the longest chain by proof-of-stake and proof-of-work in the same ratio that POS:POW coins have been awarded, so there'd be a very gradual transition to being more and more centered on proof-of-stake as time goes on.
The interest rate would depend on the block rate, of course - but for 10-minute blocks, it would be an "approximately fair" rate of interest to multiply the input by about (1+10-6)coin-blocks.
Ok, well I made ColossusCoin2 as POW/POS with fast distribution
2 minute Block time
7 day min age
28 day max age
19.1 Billion mined over the first 10 Blocks
1000 POW Coins a Block for 10,000 Blocks (works out to about 7 million POW Coins)
20 Coin minimum fee paid to miners (POW and POS)
POS reward is 5000 Coins per Block, every Block regardless of Coins Staking
Total amount of new Coins would be about 6% per year
Share of the 6% plus fees of trades would depend on Block sizes, coinage and staking activity (The float may grow at 6% but you might get 30-40% on your Coins). IMO the CLAMS distribution is the best way because you don't even need to take any Coins, you still keep your old Coins but get the new Coins as well.
I am doing an upgrade for ColossusCoin at a 20:1 ratio with 25% of the Coins reserved for the Development Fund and am looking for someone that has some more experience with the CLAMS distribution method through redeemscripts. I have been talking to the CamorraCoin developers but the dev has been absent for 4-5 days so need to find someone else that can help me with it.
You can see the thread here https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-cv2-colossuscoin20-yobitnet-novaexchange-swap-to-colx-is-closed-941433
CV2 is already in the POS only stage and trading on the alcurex exchange.
Well, Let's say you've %100 premined 1 mil coin. I would distribute this coin like that;
10% of this coin: IPO
10% of this coin: ICO (x2 price of ip price)
10% of this coin: signature campaign
10% of this coin: twitter/fb shares, followers etc.
10% of this coin: 7 day mining
...
Something like that: which covers all of the methods to distribute coins. For instance: I want to mine then I'll mine it pow mining. I don't power to mine so I'll join sig campaign. I don't want to do anything bu want coins then I'll buy with ipo/ico etc.
Everyone can collect coins how they like.
10% of this coin: IPO
10% of this coin: ICO (x2 price of ip price)
10% of this coin: signature campaign
10% of this coin: twitter/fb shares, followers etc.
10% of this coin: 7 day mining
...
Something like that: which covers all of the methods to distribute coins. For instance: I want to mine then I'll mine it pow mining. I don't power to mine so I'll join sig campaign. I don't want to do anything bu want coins then I'll buy with ipo/ico etc.
Everyone can collect coins how they like.
What are differences between IPO and ICO?
PS: We can't use mining, there is no infrastructure for that, all the coins must be distributed before the genesis block.
Well, basic difference is price.
On ipo: you designate a time let's say it's a week.
You collect funds for a week, let's say it's around 12 BTC for 100k coins.
What's ipo price? 0.00012 btc for each coin.
On ico; you designate the price of the coin. You can say ICO price is 0.00024 btc for 100k coins. Then you can collect 24 BTC for it.
Basically prices are different.
There is no difference.. Its just a different name.
Initial public offering
Initial coin offering.
I don't think there really is a reasonable way to have a 100% proof-of-stake coin that's that way from the very beginning.
I've been considering it recently, actually; I think the best I can do is to make a coin with a fixed proof-of-work award that never changes, and then inflation in the form of "interest" awarded for destroyed coin-blocks (coin-days times actual blocks-per-day) in transactions.
So, I'd start off awarding 10 coins per block, or whatever, and keep doing that indefinitely (you might prefer to stop after a couple of years) - and whenever somebody makes a transaction, the miner gets a month's worth of interest and they get the rest for proof-of-stake.
And the "longest chain" is the longest chain by proof-of-stake and proof-of-work in the same ratio that POS:POW coins have been awarded, so there'd be a very gradual transition to being more and more centered on proof-of-stake as time goes on.
The interest rate would depend on the block rate, of course - but for 10-minute blocks, it would be an "approximately fair" rate of interest to multiply the input by about (1+10-6)coin-blocks.
I like the "proof-of-location" method a lot. You would have to prove that you were at a specific location via GPS and other methods (IP ping latency?), like in an augmented reality game. So the community all around the world has the approximately the same chance.
The problem is that I don't know if it is possible to avoid cheating. So for now, I would only distribute very few coins per address and only during a limited amount of time (< few days, so cheaters first must find out how to cheat), but that would enable it to be an alternative to an IPO
The problem is that I don't know if it is possible to avoid cheating. So for now, I would only distribute very few coins per address and only during a limited amount of time (< few days, so cheaters first must find out how to cheat), but that would enable it to be an alternative to an IPO
You can also distribute among facebook accounts (of those who apply) created before certain date. And also among bitcointalk/nxtforum users: e.g., senior and hero members get a stake for free, full members pay smth, junior members pay more.
I was thinking that what you really want is as LARGE an initial user base as possible.
I don't need too many users. 1000 is max.
I was thinking that what you really want is as LARGE an initial user base as possible. You need some way of reaching AS MANY users as possible.
You can't give them away for free as that is too easy to game.
Mining / NXT asset / BitcoinTalk IPO etc etc seem too limited to 'Crypto Scene'
How do you get ordinary 'Joe Blogs' involved..
Sooo..
I would do an android/iOS app.
Sell them in the app, with in-app purchase. Say $0.69 a coin (The minimum in-app amount - it doesn't matter how many coins you get). YES - you would make some money, but there is no way round that. So would Apple and Google by the way.
Then at the end of a specified period of time(a Month ?), allocate based on how many coins sold in total. (That's why it doesn't matter how many actual coins you get, you get a percent of the total. As you did in that now infamous original NXT thread with BCNext.. I was there.. ;-)
This way, hopefully, many 10's of thousands of users can buy some of this initial stock.
You can't give them away for free as that is too easy to game.
Mining / NXT asset / BitcoinTalk IPO etc etc seem too limited to 'Crypto Scene'
How do you get ordinary 'Joe Blogs' involved..
Sooo..
I would do an android/iOS app.
Sell them in the app, with in-app purchase. Say $0.69 a coin (The minimum in-app amount - it doesn't matter how many coins you get). YES - you would make some money, but there is no way round that. So would Apple and Google by the way.
Then at the end of a specified period of time(a Month ?), allocate based on how many coins sold in total. (That's why it doesn't matter how many actual coins you get, you get a percent of the total. As you did in that now infamous original NXT thread with BCNext.. I was there.. ;-)
This way, hopefully, many 10's of thousands of users can buy some of this initial stock.
...as you would have had to been a modern day Nostradamus...
...or UtopianFuture.
Hahaha Good one.
theres no way he could have known about the second, far more throughout and technical round of sock removal. so even if he knew how to get through the first round, the second would have caught him.
Go tell that to some sucker who will believe it.
I think its not so important how you distriubute the coins , but to have a very long distribution time, lets say a year or somthing like that.
Whats the problem of taking the addresses and directly distributing it after the genesis block ?
What addresses?
Whats the problem of taking the addresses and directly distributing it after the genesis block ?
Jump to: