My dream is to somehow get rich from crypto and cash out in another country where I don't get raped heavily by taxes and live a stress free life. Of course im far from that and that just remains a dream.
Also I was about to ask what Fatoshi asked: "how do we us, the 99% of people that don't know how to code, get rich from spotting a good idea that is a success?" Aka how an investor gets rich when investors don't know how to code and just move capital.
What was so cool about bitcoin is, even some NEET that is a HS drop out and doesn't know how to code a helloworld but was able to intuitively see the importance of bitcoin, was free to get in and mine it or buy it when it was worth pennies, then get rich as fuck for this act of spotting a great idea before the rest does.
Agreed, a generic strategic methodology for becoming insanely wealthy like Roger Ver is identifying the Next Big Thing™ in its infancy and riding that wave.
In Bitcoin early adopters were rewarded for contributing to the security by PoW mining.
In
BitNet early adopters will be rewarded for contributing to the marketing, economy, and liquidity. Security in BitNet is provided by the single-minded (Nash equilibrium) hive of the users, as there are no miners, no PoW! But it isn't PoS, i.e. afaics it doesn't suffer from nothing-at-stake nor whales dominance.
In your model, from what I can understand, PoW is replaced by "proof of meritocracy",
You are referring to distribution, not security. Remember Satoshi's design for Bitcoin provided distribution and security with PoW. BitNet's security is orthogonal to its method of distribution of tokens. BitNet is initially inflationary while onboarding (hopefully billions of people). When onboarding becomes mature and transactions overtake onboarding, then BitNet becomes deflationary due to burning transaction fees with a perpetually divisible unit (i.e. the satoshi in BitNet gets smaller and smaller as time goes by but never reaching 0, i.e. Zeno's paradox of the hare and the tortoise, but not to be conflated with the
Zeno's tarpit). Note that doesn't mean the value of your hodlings get smaller. Your hodlings don't change until you transfer them and then you burn a tiny transaction fee (very tiny!). Actually
hodlings will increase due to the interest rate you will be paid for hodling.
...which means if you are not a coder, you are fucked since you can't be a miner.
You described tho that users can do some other things to still get money, but are we taking rich tier money rewards? because that's what you expect if you get involved in a project pretty much since the first day, but it's sounding to me like only the people creating the apps are going to get the big bread.
You can invest in app devs who offer to pay a dividend in BitNet tokens from their revenues in tokens.
You can be a content provider. Many of the apps are useless without content, e.g. if I launch with a blogging app a la Steem (but mine will be better!). If you write blogs for my planned blogging app, you don't get paid by upvoting. You get paid by the amount of onboarding attributable to your blog post as measured objectively on the blockchain.
Also you can do direct onboarding marketing if you are better at that, such as promoting BitNet on your social media accounts.
I am not going to tell you all the details now. These are supposed to be secrets, but I've pretty much spilled the beans now. You can deduce the rest without asking me please. All the details will of course be publicly stated when we are ready to launch.
What does the user do? Fatoshi pointed to "likes", driving traffic to an app, promoting it and whatnot... this all seems too diffuse compared to the simple act of firing up your CPU to mine bitcoins (as you could if you spotted the good idea of bitcoin back in the day, and I know I could have been one of those kids that just finished HS and heard about bitcoin in 2009 and got rich as a mf but I didn't until 2013 so I hate my life since then).
Well yes it requires more actual work. And this is an advantage for you, because then aren't competing against those who have huge capital and resources to mine with and not competing with botnets. Mining is a very
corrupt way to launch a coin because most people don't know how to mine and even most miners don't know how to source and use
the theft of botnets.
But it should end up being very highly paid work.
Another work you can do is providing liquidity, so that means finding users who will sell you their tokens in exchange for BTC (or XMR or ETH). We probably need a "in game" decentralized exchange chat bot similar to Byteball.
You could make some social media Facebook group for buying tokens or what have you, especially while BitNet is not yet on any (major) exchange. Your imagination and clever resourcefulness is the limitation.
You could market an investment fund to the users. So many creative ideas are possible.
By the time the coin gets listed in an exchange, app creators will be the whales and marketmakers. Investors that don't know how to code may be able to buy a good chunk for cheap there, but the big money is already hodled by app developers just like it was by early bitcoin miners.
We want the whales to be those who are most invested in the system. If you find a clever way to accumulate more tokens, then we want you as a whale, because you would have provided marketing and liquidity (possibly even education to the newbies also).
This is a meritocracy.
Also: what if someone starts releasing apps that are shit or are basically clones, then spreads it by use of marketing to get a ton of likes, downloads and whatnot (not sure how the "merit" will be measured, but it has to be something measurable like likes, downloads etc, can't think of anything else), and the thing becomes a store of crap just like Google apps where some people get rich from apps that are ridiculous but become viral memes? im not sure where the meritocracy is there, it seems like a race to see who is the best marketer all over again. This could be a way to game the model that I can think off.
The quality of the apps will be driven by the quality of the objective metric employed to measure onboarding. You are astute to recognize that.
We have to make sure that what we the investors are paying for (since we pay with debasement during onboarding until later when the token becomes deflationary) is the value we need in order to grow the economy and ecosystem.
Thus manipulable metrics such as Likes and downloads are not acceptable.
The metric must measure more accurately the real value of the activity in the system. We can't use payments as a metric, because that can be gamed by paying yourself pretending to be someone else or another entity.
How do you measure cognitive engagement as opposed to mindless or automatable activities?
Also: Bitnet sounds great to me. I remember Andreas A claiming how the "Bitcoin" name makes no sense since there are no coins because its keys and he suggested something similar. I think Bitcoin is a great name nonetheless and very brandable. I don't think the end user gives a fuck about the fact that there are no actual coins and is juts the ledger and the private-public keys and so on, the end users sees "coins" and that's all that matters, so I think bitcoin is a great name and Andreas since he is too much of a nerd doesn't seem to realize that. But nonetheless Bitnet sounds good. OpenShare also sounds good but reminds me a bit of a download site like "megaupload", "dropbox" and those sites.
Bitnet sounds like "Bitcoin" and everyone is dreaming to get in early on the actual "bitcoin 2.0". So if you can really pull this off, the name is cool. I would get bitnet.org and put the wallet and software and everything there just like bitcoin.org
Also the BITS token is used by coin "Bitstar" so not sure about using that same token.
I'm leaning to
BitNet instead of
OpenShare. Although the
sharing economy is cliche now, it is not as crisp when spoken and "sharing" is communistic when not qualified with the notion of an Inverse Commons form of mutually beneficial self-interest. We are driving against socialist memes.
Bitcoin is good for its shock value (a bit and a coin, hmmm), but its weakness is per
my reply to @miscreanity, it causes people to pigeonhole Bitcoin into a niche of speculation. BitNet is more diluted by the "net" permutations of names existant, but it has three advantages:
1. Free rides (actually somewhat complementary) on Bitcoin's brand (but not in an obnoxious copycoin manner, e.g. not Bitoken nor Bitscoin nor Bitcoin+ nor BitcoinDark)
2. A portmanteau which describes a new Internet (which fits perfectly with the generality of the utility of this decentralized protocol a la WWW or TCP/IP).
3. A crisp two syllables, easy to spell and say, 6 letter domain name.
Bitnet.org is for sale $20k. We'll be able to afford that once we are launched. So we'll go with
Bitnet.cash for the interim time. We can try to ask if Uphold will donate
Bitnet.io to us since they no longer need it, but we don't really need it. Maybe give them some free promotion in return.
Re: WTF is a bitcoin plus
"Bitcoin" + "Plus".
Aka "
bitC
oin++" - "Plus".