I previously mentioned that it would totally make sense to finance hackathons, i.e. project which can be implemented in 48 hours. There are programmers who would not mind getting like $1000 for such hackathon, especially if it is fun... And if one of ten will be successful, it will pay off.
How is a hackathon any different from a writeathon or a poetry contest? Just because a lot of programmers produce a lot of code it does not mean that code will be worth any money. A lot of very valuable free software doesn't make any money for the programmers writing it. Bitcoin is really a change in the model and the reason I support the deflationary model of Bitcoin is because early adopters (beta testers) and the original programmers are getting rich now. To me that is how it's supposed to work when you invent something of value for the world.
Imagine if Satoshi were paid in Devcoins instead. If Satoshi had millions of Devcoins, or even billions, it just would not work because there is no reason to mine Devcoins when 90% of profits go to the developers. Ethicoin has the advantage here in that it's fairly distributed 50/50 which to me makes a lot of sense.
This isn't true, many Devcoin bounties were paid for
- software
- open-source hardware
- logo/banner designs
- mining pools which offer an option to auto-exchange Bitcoins they mine into Devcoins
- stock market to allow Devcoin-denominated assets
I suspect that mining stocks and other Devcoin-denominated securities had a significant impact on Devcoin market cap.
This is true, but it does not change the fact that it's easier for people to get paid writing for Devcoin because the bounty system isnt automated while Devtome is.
Particularly, this one:
https://cryptostocks.com/securities/14 Ignore description, this is basically a Glari Mining Project (GMP) passthrough which pays Devcoins.
I suspect that when GMP will receive ASICs devcoin value might substantially go up...
And I'm saying it wont substatially go up. I know you have the masters degree in mathematics but lets see who is right. Our differences are philosophical and not based on abstract calculations. The statistics are what they are, the numbers are what they are, but I interpret them to mean something different. Let's find out who is right and if I'm wrong then I will eat my words but if you are wrong then perhaps you should consider a different model and consider my suggestion of a hard fork.
Anyway, Devcoin is pretty cool if you ignore everything about Devtome. It isn't about communism, it isn't about paying as many workers as possible. It is about providing capital for cool open-source projects.
If it's about paying as many workers as possible are you saying that people who produce code are somehow more valuable than people who write poems and books? I'm saying they are relatively the same because the nature of the work is relatively the same. This is why the pay should be relatively the same.
But you're under the impression that somehow if we turn all the writers into programmers that this will make any difference? It's still just people getting paid for language arts, it's not going to make any real difference. Devcoin isn't going to become more valuable just because some guys writing python and visual basic are making apps for Devcoins instead of a bunch of guys writing novels and poems. My argument is that Fin Shaggy has done more to popularize Devcoin than anyone else and he did it with his words, not writing code.
I think perhaps the problem with Devcoin is that it can only support a finite amount of writers and programmers at a time. That isn't how a market is supposed to work. When more people are willing to work, the pie isn't supposed to shrink. When productivity and quality increases the profits aren't supposed to shrink. That is what I see happening with Devtome. Devtome is more popular than ever, has higher quality works being produced than ever, yet the pay for each worker is going down?
This provides no further incentive for workers to improve quality, or produce better work. The same will apply to programmers, eventually the pay ceiling for programmers will be reached just as it is for writers and then no amount of innovation, hard work, or quality will transcend that ceiling.
That is the problem with Devcoin in the immediate future. Unless quality and innovation is rewarded then it's all going to fail. And no one said anything about communism, but the purpose of Devcoin and of an economy in general is to allow people to trade and in this case people want to trade writing because Devcoin currently supports only writing.
Bounties are going to be very limited. So basically you're saying Devcoin is always going to be a very small market which can't really grow too large or it stops working. That is why I say it's broken from the start.
