Topic: [C3] Coin Brainstorming / Ideas / Proposals thread (Read 3336 times)
This is certainly true to a great degree that we frown upon holding coins as a speculative investment, feeling this is both unfair and counter to the job that money should perform. The combination of a large amount of the coin base being given away along with the demurrage make speculation less attractive, but they likely do not remove it entirely. Were willing to tolerate some degree of early adopter enrichment, as it's clearly a vehicle for rapid adoption and establishing an exchange rate. It may also be that it's simply unavoidable unless we went to the extreme of selling all coins from a central stock at a fixed Dollar rate and then maintained a pegged exchange rate. That would be what many other local complementary currencies do (like BerkShares), which makes them essentially coupons for the national currency and eliminates any speculative potential. Sovereignage is a sticky problem indeed.
Many of the ideas discussed here are similar to or in alignment with Freicoin's goals. Even if you eventually do make your own coin you might find that collaborating on some of your technical advancements with Freicoin developers fruitful. Currently we are focused on improving difficulty adjustment methods with plans to look at compressing the chain for faster downloading and distributed voting in the future. This is on top of demurrage and smoothly varying (no 'halfing' day) mining reward innovations already present at launch. While our economic views lay well outside BTC norms (were anti-deflation) were committed to open-source development and sharing good innovations with the community. Check out our forums http://www.freicoin.org/index.php
I think Freicoin lacks the hook, that BTC et.al has, the prospect of an investment vehicle is the most sure way to hook people into the system en-masse, then after it meets full or near full market penetration it will stabilize and be used as a currency.
I know your not supposed to hoard BTC, but that is a necessary evil. FreiCoin Demurage the loss while holding while actually great attactks the problem from an idealistic point of view
Many of the ideas discussed here are similar to or in alignment with Freicoin's goals. Even if you eventually do make your own coin you might find that collaborating on some of your technical advancements with Freicoin developers fruitful. Currently we are focused on improving difficulty adjustment methods with plans to look at compressing the chain for faster downloading and distributed voting in the future. This is on top of demurrage and smoothly varying (no 'halfing' day) mining reward innovations already present at launch. While our economic views lay well outside BTC norms (were anti-deflation) were committed to open-source development and sharing good innovations with the community. Check out our forums http://www.freicoin.org/index.php
One of the problems with altcoins is that they can't really be used for anything other than exchanging them for other coins. It's going to be tough to get merchants to widely accept a new altcoin, but bitcoin is becoming more and more popular. I don't know if this is technically possible, but what if you could send coins from the C3 wallet to a bitcoin address. The funds would be automatically transferred to bitcoins through an exchange and then sent to the address.
Ever thought about implementing a tier system for those who have GPU farms?
I think it's crazy those who can't afford much and want to mine,are walked over by those with gpu farms that contain 20 or more GPUS.
It's even worse when the very few who have ASICs,pretty much bomb the difficulty of new currency up to the level of bit coin over night.
My thoughts are that the more GPU's you have, the more you're taxed. What is taxed is sent to a community faucet.
This taxing is tied to IP address.
I only have 47 Byte coin after days of mining,where folks in the same period have mined several hundred if not thousands..
The well off then crash the price when the coin goes onto an exchange.
I think it's crazy those who can't afford much and want to mine,are walked over by those with gpu farms that contain 20 or more GPUS.
It's even worse when the very few who have ASICs,pretty much bomb the difficulty of new currency up to the level of bit coin over night.
My thoughts are that the more GPU's you have, the more you're taxed. What is taxed is sent to a community faucet.
This taxing is tied to IP address.
I only have 47 Byte coin after days of mining,where folks in the same period have mined several hundred if not thousands..
The well off then crash the price when the coin goes onto an exchange.
not sure about this....
the arms race does drive innovation and secure the chain
Ever thought about implementing a tier system for those who have GPU farms?
I think it's crazy those who can't afford much and want to mine,are walked over by those with gpu farms that contain 20 or more GPUS.
It's even worse when the very few who have ASICs,pretty much bomb the difficulty of new currency up to the level of bit coin over night.
My thoughts are that the more GPU's you have, the more you're taxed. What is taxed is sent to a community faucet.
This taxing is tied to IP address.
I only have 47 Byte coin after days of mining,where folks in the same period have mined several hundred if not thousands..
The well off then crash the price when the coin goes onto an exchange.
I think it's crazy those who can't afford much and want to mine,are walked over by those with gpu farms that contain 20 or more GPUS.
It's even worse when the very few who have ASICs,pretty much bomb the difficulty of new currency up to the level of bit coin over night.
My thoughts are that the more GPU's you have, the more you're taxed. What is taxed is sent to a community faucet.
This taxing is tied to IP address.
I only have 47 Byte coin after days of mining,where folks in the same period have mined several hundred if not thousands..
The well off then crash the price when the coin goes onto an exchange.
The way PoS and PoW works is different to PPCoin.
There are only proof of stake blocks. There are no PoW blocks.
PoW coin creation is transactions. A block can include multiple coinbase transactions.
PoW becomes an initial currency seeding mechanism - should be all gone in maybe a year or so.
No inflation.
There are only proof of stake blocks. There are no PoW blocks.
PoW coin creation is transactions. A block can include multiple coinbase transactions.
PoW becomes an initial currency seeding mechanism - should be all gone in maybe a year or so.
No inflation.
Thoughts on this? Now I think this is quite a good model.. You can't 51% this coin no matter how much hashpower you have, and coin generation uses PoW.
Idea: Initial coin release is done through the equivalent of set difficulty mining - generate processing intensive hashes, if the first X bits are all zeroes AND that coin isn't already made then you just created a coin.
Example:
de345cf32de1ab9: no coin
96f7410e7925cc5: no coin
000000ac9531cee: coin
0000001ab98f9dac: coin
[...]
000000ac9531cee: no coin (already made)
Can just use TX hash for that. If TX hash starts with X 0 bits, AND it has no inputs, AND it has only one 1 coin output, AND first x bits of the TX hash is unique, then it passes the successful create coin check.
Those "create coin" TXes would be broadcasted and would be confirmed after being included in the blockchain. The blockchain is purely generated by Proof of Stake. Proof of Stake mining just earns transaction fees (which are required to send transactions, so the create coin TXes would have to include a fee that the PoS finds acceptable)
Initially the network would be seeded via a genesis block that gives the seed PoS node 0.5% of the total monetary supply.
Advantages:
* No mining pools needed! Each PoS block is expected to hold multiple create coin TXes with PoW.
* Rate of new blocks not tied to hashpower vs difficulty.
* Can't be 51% attacked unless you own more than 51% of all coins in existence
* No "mass block time" at the start of the coin's life, difficulty goes from 1 to 4 to 16 to 64 because that's the max jump..
* Energy efficient after all the monetary supply would have being created
* Scales with more hashpowers which can be somewhat linked to new users
* Limit on max amount of coins.
Example:
de345cf32de1ab9: no coin
96f7410e7925cc5: no coin
000000ac9531cee: coin
0000001ab98f9dac: coin
[...]
000000ac9531cee: no coin (already made)
Can just use TX hash for that. If TX hash starts with X 0 bits, AND it has no inputs, AND it has only one 1 coin output, AND first x bits of the TX hash is unique, then it passes the successful create coin check.
Those "create coin" TXes would be broadcasted and would be confirmed after being included in the blockchain. The blockchain is purely generated by Proof of Stake. Proof of Stake mining just earns transaction fees (which are required to send transactions, so the create coin TXes would have to include a fee that the PoS finds acceptable)
Initially the network would be seeded via a genesis block that gives the seed PoS node 0.5% of the total monetary supply.
Advantages:
* No mining pools needed! Each PoS block is expected to hold multiple create coin TXes with PoW.
* Rate of new blocks not tied to hashpower vs difficulty.
* Can't be 51% attacked unless you own more than 51% of all coins in existence
* No "mass block time" at the start of the coin's life, difficulty goes from 1 to 4 to 16 to 64 because that's the max jump..
* Energy efficient after all the monetary supply would have being created
* Scales with more hashpowers which can be somewhat linked to new users
* Limit on max amount of coins.
Is this not much of PPC?
I'd like to see mining seamlessy integrated in end users devices (like a desktop screen saver or something like this running on low CPU usage).
Millions of computers already running could be transformed into something like "micro-miners".
Millions of computers already running could be transformed into something like "micro-miners".
That's cool for a project like folding@home, but there is really no way to do that without centralization.
pipe dream/s
1. We need non government organizations to be able to some how tap the computing power of the coin's community.
200 TH/S is fucking crazy, how can we allow organizations who use super computers to cure cancer to tap that power?
2. Some one suggested the idea of a PRIME coin.
Perhaps we can use the computation power of the C3 network to improve the encryption or the security of the coin,as the coin's computing power increases ?
Therefore the coin becomes harder to hack as the popularity increases. Eventually Bit coin will have a network power of 1 PH/S
1. We need non government organizations to be able to some how tap the computing power of the coin's community.
200 TH/S is fucking crazy, how can we allow organizations who use super computers to cure cancer to tap that power?
2. Some one suggested the idea of a PRIME coin.
Perhaps we can use the computation power of the C3 network to improve the encryption or the security of the coin,as the coin's computing power increases ?
Therefore the coin becomes harder to hack as the popularity increases. Eventually Bit coin will have a network power of 1 PH/S
What if the network of the coin could assign work (could be smaller bits, not necessarily a very time-expensive Prime (LL) test) from the mersenne-project and randomly distributes it to the coin-network. Work could be distributed to more than one miner to verify the results and to prevent cheating.
As it is now for all cryptocurrencies in existence: the calculation (hashing) power is only used for "guessing" a correct hash which basically only produces hot air. I'd really like to see a coin that makes use of that calculation power and includes the prime (or similar) calculations.
Thoughts on this? Now I think this is quite a good model.. You can't 51% this coin no matter how much hashpower you have, and coin generation uses PoW.
Idea: Initial coin release is done through the equivalent of set difficulty mining - generate processing intensive hashes, if the first X bits are all zeroes AND that coin isn't already made then you just created a coin.
Example:
de345cf32de1ab9: no coin
96f7410e7925cc5: no coin
000000ac9531cee: coin
0000001ab98f9dac: coin
[...]
000000ac9531cee: no coin (already made)
Can just use TX hash for that. If TX hash starts with X 0 bits, AND it has no inputs, AND it has only one 1 coin output, AND first x bits of the TX hash is unique, then it passes the successful create coin check.
Those "create coin" TXes would be broadcasted and would be confirmed after being included in the blockchain. The blockchain is purely generated by Proof of Stake. Proof of Stake mining just earns transaction fees (which are required to send transactions, so the create coin TXes would have to include a fee that the PoS finds acceptable)
Initially the network would be seeded via a genesis block that gives the seed PoS node 0.5% of the total monetary supply.
Advantages:
* No mining pools needed! Each PoS block is expected to hold multiple create coin TXes with PoW.
* Rate of new blocks not tied to hashpower vs difficulty.
* Can't be 51% attacked unless you own more than 51% of all coins in existence
* No "mass block time" at the start of the coin's life, difficulty goes from 1 to 4 to 16 to 64 because that's the max jump..
* Energy efficient after all the monetary supply would have being created
* Scales with more hashpowers which can be somewhat linked to new users
* Limit on max amount of coins.
Example:
de345cf32de1ab9: no coin
96f7410e7925cc5: no coin
000000ac9531cee: coin
0000001ab98f9dac: coin
[...]
000000ac9531cee: no coin (already made)
Can just use TX hash for that. If TX hash starts with X 0 bits, AND it has no inputs, AND it has only one 1 coin output, AND first x bits of the TX hash is unique, then it passes the successful create coin check.
Those "create coin" TXes would be broadcasted and would be confirmed after being included in the blockchain. The blockchain is purely generated by Proof of Stake. Proof of Stake mining just earns transaction fees (which are required to send transactions, so the create coin TXes would have to include a fee that the PoS finds acceptable)
Initially the network would be seeded via a genesis block that gives the seed PoS node 0.5% of the total monetary supply.
Advantages:
* No mining pools needed! Each PoS block is expected to hold multiple create coin TXes with PoW.
* Rate of new blocks not tied to hashpower vs difficulty.
* Can't be 51% attacked unless you own more than 51% of all coins in existence
* No "mass block time" at the start of the coin's life, difficulty goes from 1 to 4 to 16 to 64 because that's the max jump..
* Energy efficient after all the monetary supply would have being created
* Scales with more hashpowers which can be somewhat linked to new users
* Limit on max amount of coins.
That's a pretty interesting way to distribute coins. How exactly would the proof of stake blocks work in this example, though? How does one generate a proof of stake block? I think ppcoin has showed that it's not exactly the simplest thing in the world to do with adequate security and robustness.
However, I think it's possible to reduce dust and unspendable outputs without reducing divisibility. I think you could still have divisibility to 8 digits (or thereabouts) but then enforce a rule that a transaction can't have outputs smaller than .0001 (or thereabouts).
This rule has no performance or storage benefit, and will case a hard fork in case we want to allow spending less than 0.0001 in the future.Perhaps 4 digits is too small - maybe 5 or 6?
No storage benefit? I see eliminating dust outputs as having storage benefits, am I wrong? The number of 0s is arbitrary and depends on the number of coins that exist, but with bitcoin for example you could still allow transactions to have precision down to the satoshi level but require that every output be at least 1 microBit in size. Yes, if bitcoin is ever worth $100k+ then you might need to hard fork and add some more decimal places at the end, but then you could give 1/100th satoshi precision while requiring all outputs be at least 1 satoshi. Either way, this prevents the practice of sending 1 satoshi transactions which has basically nothing to do with commerce, it's just either spam or messaging.
You could also require a fee on any transaction that creates dust outputs.
My few ideas about concept of better coin:
1) It would be nice to have a real decentralization - not just about 5 big pools (many reasons for that). How about making it somehow double-layer like this:
Miners will be hashing individual transactions. So every transaction would have a hash (that meets the difficulty) and address for reward.
There will be normal blockchain with reward for finder, but it will contain all those hashed transactions with its rewards.
=> The mining reward system (count of rewards) scales with number of transactions. So millions of users are able to solomine... not just the elite and pools.
2) Since part of rewards would come directly from transactions, this rewards can be used to form any kind of economy system.
2a) For example some kind of small constant inflation (that minimises fees) can be added if desired. Each transaction reward can be based on the age of its coin (I mean last used). So 1 year old coin creates 0.01 reward, 2 years old coin creates 0.02 reward etc.
=> Total money supply curve would be exponential, but in perfect control and quite predictable...
=> Miners would likely prefer older and higher transactions...
2b) Or it can be done the opposite way - some kind of millionaire tax - higher transaction with higher fees...
2c) Probably multiple reward equations will be later tested in new forks that will appear the same way as other alternate currencies appears now...
Problems:
3) Size: Yes, I realize, that it would bloat blockchain even more, but solution for bloating the chain will have to be found no matter if block size is 1MB or 3MB...
4) Transactions' solutions: This concept will require a mechanism to distribute individual transactions' solutions and accepting it by all others (more miners will often find the solution for the same transaction like in block solving now).
How about a second really small, simple, speed-optimized blockchain of individual transactions?
=> Lightweight miners would no longer require to download the full chain, just receive transaction and last block of this transaction chain.
Fullweight miners can participate in both transaction mining and mainchain mining... as they see it profitable...
5) No premining - if we want it to succeed, start date will have to be known months in advance. And it has to start with proper difficulty, so there is absolutely no contra-arguments later...
6) Blockchain bloating has to be solved... I got an idea, why not do it distributed like torrents? Each user could hold only some random blocks from chain... and some number of last ones based on desired security.
7) This multy-layer idea can be formed to any technology, even enable to mix them... For example let the masses mine the transactions with GPUs (some asic proof algorithm) and let the pros to mine main-blocks with asics (sha256)...
[edit0] Typos, english++..
1) It would be nice to have a real decentralization - not just about 5 big pools (many reasons for that). How about making it somehow double-layer like this:
Miners will be hashing individual transactions. So every transaction would have a hash (that meets the difficulty) and address for reward.
There will be normal blockchain with reward for finder, but it will contain all those hashed transactions with its rewards.
=> The mining reward system (count of rewards) scales with number of transactions. So millions of users are able to solomine... not just the elite and pools.
2) Since part of rewards would come directly from transactions, this rewards can be used to form any kind of economy system.
2a) For example some kind of small constant inflation (that minimises fees) can be added if desired. Each transaction reward can be based on the age of its coin (I mean last used). So 1 year old coin creates 0.01 reward, 2 years old coin creates 0.02 reward etc.
=> Total money supply curve would be exponential, but in perfect control and quite predictable...
=> Miners would likely prefer older and higher transactions...
2b) Or it can be done the opposite way - some kind of millionaire tax - higher transaction with higher fees...
2c) Probably multiple reward equations will be later tested in new forks that will appear the same way as other alternate currencies appears now...
Problems:
3) Size: Yes, I realize, that it would bloat blockchain even more, but solution for bloating the chain will have to be found no matter if block size is 1MB or 3MB...
4) Transactions' solutions: This concept will require a mechanism to distribute individual transactions' solutions and accepting it by all others (more miners will often find the solution for the same transaction like in block solving now).
How about a second really small, simple, speed-optimized blockchain of individual transactions?
=> Lightweight miners would no longer require to download the full chain, just receive transaction and last block of this transaction chain.
Fullweight miners can participate in both transaction mining and mainchain mining... as they see it profitable...
5) No premining - if we want it to succeed, start date will have to be known months in advance. And it has to start with proper difficulty, so there is absolutely no contra-arguments later...
6) Blockchain bloating has to be solved... I got an idea, why not do it distributed like torrents? Each user could hold only some random blocks from chain... and some number of last ones based on desired security.
7) This multy-layer idea can be formed to any technology, even enable to mix them... For example let the masses mine the transactions with GPUs (some asic proof algorithm) and let the pros to mine main-blocks with asics (sha256)...
[edit0] Typos, english++..
Thoughts on this? Now I think this is quite a good model.. You can't 51% this coin no matter how much hashpower you have, and coin generation uses PoW.
Idea: Initial coin release is done through the equivalent of set difficulty mining - generate processing intensive hashes, if the first X bits are all zeroes AND that coin isn't already made then you just created a coin.
Example:
de345cf32de1ab9: no coin
96f7410e7925cc5: no coin
000000ac9531cee: coin
0000001ab98f9dac: coin
[...]
000000ac9531cee: no coin (already made)
Can just use TX hash for that. If TX hash starts with X 0 bits, AND it has no inputs, AND it has only one 1 coin output, AND first x bits of the TX hash is unique, then it passes the successful create coin check.
Those "create coin" TXes would be broadcasted and would be confirmed after being included in the blockchain. The blockchain is purely generated by Proof of Stake. Proof of Stake mining just earns transaction fees (which are required to send transactions, so the create coin TXes would have to include a fee that the PoS finds acceptable)
Initially the network would be seeded via a genesis block that gives the seed PoS node 0.5% of the total monetary supply.
Advantages:
* No mining pools needed! Each PoS block is expected to hold multiple create coin TXes with PoW.
* Rate of new blocks not tied to hashpower vs difficulty.
* Can't be 51% attacked unless you own more than 51% of all coins in existence
* No "mass block time" at the start of the coin's life, difficulty goes from 1 to 4 to 16 to 64 because that's the max jump..
* Energy efficient after all the monetary supply would have being created
* Scales with more hashpowers which can be somewhat linked to new users
* Limit on max amount of coins.
Example:
de345cf32de1ab9: no coin
96f7410e7925cc5: no coin
000000ac9531cee: coin
0000001ab98f9dac: coin
[...]
000000ac9531cee: no coin (already made)
Can just use TX hash for that. If TX hash starts with X 0 bits, AND it has no inputs, AND it has only one 1 coin output, AND first x bits of the TX hash is unique, then it passes the successful create coin check.
Those "create coin" TXes would be broadcasted and would be confirmed after being included in the blockchain. The blockchain is purely generated by Proof of Stake. Proof of Stake mining just earns transaction fees (which are required to send transactions, so the create coin TXes would have to include a fee that the PoS finds acceptable)
Initially the network would be seeded via a genesis block that gives the seed PoS node 0.5% of the total monetary supply.
Advantages:
* No mining pools needed! Each PoS block is expected to hold multiple create coin TXes with PoW.
* Rate of new blocks not tied to hashpower vs difficulty.
* Can't be 51% attacked unless you own more than 51% of all coins in existence
* No "mass block time" at the start of the coin's life, difficulty goes from 1 to 4 to 16 to 64 because that's the max jump..
* Energy efficient after all the monetary supply would have being created
* Scales with more hashpowers which can be somewhat linked to new users
* Limit on max amount of coins.
Easy access to the new coin for all computers, something like equal share, the right to coins for person/pc, more people owning coins, more trades, more pressure for the market to adopt it.
After the experience with the bitcoin, equal share means a true mania to get rich for the little guy and a true mania from Pakistan to Chile, from Indonesia to Spain is necessary for the new coin to rise to the top.
Coins for the masses.
Keep in mind, Wordpress wasn't the first CMS but it's the most popular today.
Just some ideas, maybe I'm wrong.
An article on Bloomberg about the weakness of the bitcoin in comparision with state money
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-04/sorry-libertarians-history-shows-bitcoin-isn-t-the-future.html
After the experience with the bitcoin, equal share means a true mania to get rich for the little guy and a true mania from Pakistan to Chile, from Indonesia to Spain is necessary for the new coin to rise to the top.
Coins for the masses.
Keep in mind, Wordpress wasn't the first CMS but it's the most popular today.
Just some ideas, maybe I'm wrong.
An article on Bloomberg about the weakness of the bitcoin in comparision with state money
Quote
It's a remarkable success, but it won't be the future of money. Even putting aside security problems -- not surprisingly, a digital currency is a favorite target of hackers -- there’s the potential that Bitcoin will turn from a way of doing anonymous, simple digital transactions and into a speculative-asset investment item, especially if it continues to soar in price. That might promote hoarding of Bitcoins by early adopters and choke off the marketplace. Although transactions haven’t fallen off a cliff yet, a currency whose value is distinctly bubble-tastic is not something that even digital libertarians will readily spend.
Here’s where a state could easily step in by just … printing more money, so that economic activity is not choked off by scarcity or hoarding.
Here’s where a state could easily step in by just … printing more money, so that economic activity is not choked off by scarcity or hoarding.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-04/sorry-libertarians-history-shows-bitcoin-isn-t-the-future.html
I have thought about this but the problem is when you just get "it" given to you, in equal shares....the uptake may not work
the only reason to stimulate uptake is to see a massive appreciation, that get peoples attention, makes them think how to provide services, it get attention then settles into its constant state determined by market penetration....then it becomes a tradable currency
you may need this early adopter effect to bootstrap the CC as a serious Currency contender
Easy access to the new coin for all computers, something like equal share, the right to coins for person/pc, more people owning coins, more trades, more pressure for the market to adopt it.
After the experience with the bitcoin, equal share means a true mania to get rich for the little guy and a true mania from Pakistan to Chile, from Indonesia to Spain is necessary for the new coin to rise to the top.
Coins for the masses.
Keep in mind, Wordpress wasn't the first CMS but it's the most popular today.
Just some ideas, maybe I'm wrong.
An article on Bloomberg about the weakness of the bitcoin in comparision with state money
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-04/sorry-libertarians-history-shows-bitcoin-isn-t-the-future.html
After the experience with the bitcoin, equal share means a true mania to get rich for the little guy and a true mania from Pakistan to Chile, from Indonesia to Spain is necessary for the new coin to rise to the top.
Coins for the masses.
Keep in mind, Wordpress wasn't the first CMS but it's the most popular today.
Just some ideas, maybe I'm wrong.
An article on Bloomberg about the weakness of the bitcoin in comparision with state money
Quote
It's a remarkable success, but it won't be the future of money. Even putting aside security problems -- not surprisingly, a digital currency is a favorite target of hackers -- there’s the potential that Bitcoin will turn from a way of doing anonymous, simple digital transactions and into a speculative-asset investment item, especially if it continues to soar in price. That might promote hoarding of Bitcoins by early adopters and choke off the marketplace. Although transactions haven’t fallen off a cliff yet, a currency whose value is distinctly bubble-tastic is not something that even digital libertarians will readily spend.
Here’s where a state could easily step in by just … printing more money, so that economic activity is not choked off by scarcity or hoarding.
Here’s where a state could easily step in by just … printing more money, so that economic activity is not choked off by scarcity or hoarding.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-04-04/sorry-libertarians-history-shows-bitcoin-isn-t-the-future.html
Lamport signatures are an interesting idea to make the coin "quantum-proof". Use it for generating and signing addresses?
Yes a quantum proof system would be a vast improvement.
Also make some sort system that charges for something like Satoshi dice to it can't get a free ride.
Lamport signatures are an interesting idea to make the coin "quantum-proof". Use it for generating and signing addresses?
I've had an idea floating around for a while, either for Bitcoin, or an alt coin, in which a Lamport one-time signature scheme is incorporated into the flow, which would (should) make the coin future proof.
My thoughts so far from the other thead.
Jump to: