Topic: Ideas for more efficient distribution of money? (Read 13275 times)
this is an important tool to build in my opinion. It might cause some people in the bitcoin community great distress if the USPS, UPS, or FedEx ever decided to make it even harder or impossible to ship or receive packages anonymously if there is no working alternative.
We are giving out 500 ozziecoins free to the first 500 Australian residents on ANZAC day.
Launch: https://ozziecoin.com/faucet/info.php
Info: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-091-ozziecoin-australias-first-widely-distributed-digital-coin-578881
We're trying to get the wider Australian public to simply tryout Blockchain technology.
Launch: https://ozziecoin.com/faucet/info.php
Info: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/ann-091-ozziecoin-australias-first-widely-distributed-digital-coin-578881
We're trying to get the wider Australian public to simply tryout Blockchain technology.
From the article:
Quote
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed
What's cool about that?
Maybe active traders find passive trading too boring. They need the thrill of the hunt. Or maybe they just have some extra time and money to burn.
Provide a convincing cover story. You know that story about a fixed supply of 21 million coins? That fearful creator who disappeared? The highly convoluted decentralised and trust-free structure, the Bitcoin Rube Goldberg machine, because centralisation is evil? It's a stroke of genius from a marketing point of view (assuming it wasn't all a hilarious cosmic accident).
Whatever alternative you promote, like:
--demurrage or perpetual inflation
--some element of centrally planned spending that covers more than just network maintenance.
--smarter inflation that dis-empowers speculators,
or some balanced combination, you'll probably find that at best you'll get a lukewarm reception (think: polite clapping) from a small number of pragmatic, reasonable people who stumble upon your idea. But you won't gain traction unless you rally some religious fervour to give your cause a kick-start and also give it protective padding against growth pains. You really need to figure this out.
Whatever alternative you promote, like:
--demurrage or perpetual inflation
--some element of centrally planned spending that covers more than just network maintenance.
--smarter inflation that dis-empowers speculators,
or some balanced combination, you'll probably find that at best you'll get a lukewarm reception (think: polite clapping) from a small number of pragmatic, reasonable people who stumble upon your idea. But you won't gain traction unless you rally some religious fervour to give your cause a kick-start and also give it protective padding against growth pains. You really need to figure this out.
At Freicoin we hope to stir up some righteous fervor over Usury, it is after all the one sin condemned by Moses, Jesus, Mohammad and Buddha.
Impaler: How does demurrage affect interest on loans? It seems like there is built in incentive to lend due to the carrying cost of money. Could loans of 0% interest be mutually beneficial assuming the existence of collateral?
So instead for Xcoin - design it so that as much as possible of the cost of 'mining' is gradually and increasingly diverted to be spent on things that work towards increased circulation - e.g. a fund that gives out 0% loans, or that invests in new Xcoin based business, or direct transfers to people with the stipulation that they must spend the money within x period of time etc.
The last item is Freicoin's demurrage. I have mentioned that it may make more sense than demurrage to distribute it in small granularity to miners doing CPU-only mining.
Regarding ASICs:
Hey wait...
MemoryCoin = the coin that require memory
MemoryCoin = the coin that require memory
That is why I am asking him if his domain might be for sale at a high enough price, assuming he owns memorycoin.com and .org. And hopefully memcoin.* also.
Memory is generally available. It is an investment in an asset you use. The extra memory can be employed in a ramdisk when not mining to aid compiling speed and other tasks. ASICs not.
Edit: Memory is fungible, meaning you can sell/repurpose it in parts and separate from the PC.
thanks for the econ lesson buddy 
Yes, there are always barriers to entry, but Bitocin was designed to encourage concentration (assuming Satoshi was aware of the hardware arms race possibility, which I think he was).
Anyway, that's just a footnote to my main point.
Yes, there are always barriers to entry, but Bitocin was designed to encourage concentration (assuming Satoshi was aware of the hardware arms race possibility, which I think he was).
Anyway, that's just a footnote to my main point.
Spell it out please.
Assume a coin, we'll call it Xcoin.
Say the cost (research + equipment + electricity) to mine 1 Xcoin is 0.8 Xcoin.
I'm using a random figure for cost in this example. In a perfect market costs will tend towards 1.0 (this is not the case with BTC since increasing barriers to entry are creating mining monopolies*), except during early adoption periods when costs are very low** thus driving investment.
For BTC the money is being spent on:
paying mining equipment manufacturers (highly centralized, have incentive to hoard BTC rather than spend them)
energy companies (inefficient, wasteful, do not use or spend BTC).
So instead for Xcoin - design it so that as much as possible of the cost of 'mining' is gradually and increasingly diverted to be spent on things that work towards increased circulation - e.g. a fund that gives out 0% loans, or that invests in new Xcoin based business, or direct transfers to people with the stipulation that they must spend the money within x period of time etc.
* In a mature market, counteracting specialized mining equipment will therefore lower average profit. The only time when non specialized equipment can be used to extract excess profits is when the market is new. The best way to maintain incentive to mine is therefore probably to fix the rate of profit (while gradually decreasing it over time using an algorithm).
**technically, when expressed using the same denomination costs will be infinity (since the coin at this stage is worth nothing), but in terms of resource expenditure costs will be very low.
Spell it out please.
To distribute money more efficiently all you need to do is ensure that 'mining' (the process itself, not its results) has a net positive effect (involves expenditure on renewable goods and services) instead of a net negative one (energy waste). It's simple as that.
(quoting myself here...)
OK it's not quite as simple as that, because you have to factor in time horizons and the early adoption phase, in which coin production costs are marginal (thus not allowing for efficient distribution). With BTC the design was such that a great deal of coins were produced during the early phase for a very low cost (the first 1,000,000 BTC were mined for a cost of what it would take to mine less than 1 BTC today, roughly speaking).
More efficient distribution would thus require (aside from finding a way to make mining a net positive process) a shorter early adoption phase in which production costs are trivial, so that we could arrive at the point where mining produces tangible positive effects more quickly. However, the early adoption phase should still last long enough and be lucrative enough for the coin to gain popularity.
Efficiency in the context of this thread is the rate (relative to the maximum possible rate) of adoption of the currency as a currency and not as an investment asset. Very few people in normal times (before sovereign debt crisis safe haven demand) considered holding dollars long-term (in your mattress, i.e paying no interest) as an investment. A hallmark feature of a currency is you rarely concern yourself with its exchange value.
I am asserting that the challenge is to design an upstart crypto-currency which has enough near-term investment appeal to drive excitement and investment adoption, while simultaneously driving synergistic adoption for spending which eventually subsumes the investment gains.
Some here are challenging my assertion.
this challenge is precisely what my suggestion addresses! Think about it more closely (or do I have to spell it out?)
Actually thank you for the sentiments and I knew that, as well appreciated the liquidity you brought me at that time and was happy to give you some suggestions at that time, but we diverged in our activities and goals. You may think this again. Let's pray Bitcoin doesn't crash to $500 before going higher so you don't reinvest that $1 million (1000+ BTC) back in Bitcoin's ponzi again. So you won't be too distraught when the bitter end for Bitcoin comes. I do note you are diversified, e.g. precious metals. But the precious metals are going lower before they make new all time highs (after 2015) the G20 is likely going to confiscate them. So don't count your eggs before they hatch.
It doesn't make sense to say to hope the price doesn't go down to $500 before the end of bitcoin comes since the end would surely give these prices and bellow and hence Risto will be buying in again anyway. Unless the end you speak of would be an instantaneous zero valuation which is so remotely unlikely we can dismay it. Also I'm curious on how an end would manifest itself in your mind? Let's say the end would in fact come in the beginning of 2014. With both US and Chinese governments sending careful positive signals the biggest immediate threat as I see it is already somewhat eliminated. I think it's much more likely we see a bubble pop and people like yourself start talking about the end of bitcoin but in reality it's just a natural market reaction which bitcoin has already experienced several times and new all time highs will come within months.
Richard Stallman* has spoken out in favor of anonymity instead of Bitcoin:
* GNU tools, Free Software Foundation, the precursor to Eric S Raymond's Cathedral and the Bazaar which coined "open source" as a more ameniable notion than "free software". Stallman always politicizes and has a social cause in his software endeavors.
* GNU tools, Free Software Foundation, the precursor to Eric S Raymond's Cathedral and the Bazaar which coined "open source" as a more ameniable notion than "free software". Stallman always politicizes and has a social cause in his software endeavors.
The government is phasing out cash, as I covered in my prior post.
Now whether anonymity will work reliably and whether the coin can't be shutdown by filtering at the routers controlled by the major governments is technical discussion that will have to wait until the details of such a coin are known.
It will have to be very technically robust to survive. Government will be looking for scapegoats to blame the debt collapse on.
Anonymous cryptocurrency is sure to be a target.
Many people in government are going to be looking for a place to hide their ill-gotten wealth from the 99% as they take it from the 1%. They might just like to have a haven too. (sorry there are no absolutes, no perfection)
They will still be able to get all those people who mess up and don't report transactions and wealth that can't be anonymous. And I think they will be much busier hunting down all the Bitcoin millionaires who cashed out. That will rather easier to do than blocking all internet traffic of a certain type in every country in the world (I don't think they can do this yet, although maybe I am naive).
I think they will find much lower hanging fruit, but again some of that determination is in the technical details.
Anonymity is the not the main or single feature I want to see in an altcoin.
The government is phasing out cash, as I covered in my prior post.
Now whether anonymity will work reliably and whether the coin can't be shutdown by filtering at the routers controlled by the major governments is technical discussion that will have to wait until the details of such a coin are known.
It will have to be very technically robust to survive. Government will be looking for scapegoats to blame the debt collapse on.
Anonymous cryptocurrency is sure to be a target.
Devil is in the details. You should not accept a package without opening it to inspect the contents.
Fair enough consider my conversion a statement of intent rather then a binding contract.
There are no absolutes in the universe.
Absolutely none?
Indeed mathematically proven to be so. Find my post where I talked about Shannon-Nyquist sampling theorem and the impossibility to both band-limit and time-limit sampling without getting infinite frequencies of aliasing error and I linked to the following blog article of mine:
http://unheresy.com/The%20Universe.html#Matter_as_a_continuum
Edit: in addition to the link above, refer to the original discussion which I quoted below in case Risto deletes from his thread which he seems to do a lot:
If a guy has found such a pattern in Bitcoin price and made it visible from all the noise, and if that even somehow matches a long history up to this point, I'm going to listen to him very closely.
OMG, the dopamine spikes from the get-rich-quick-fever are running so high that the new religion is finding information in aliasing error[1].
[1] Shannon-Nyquist Sampling Theorem
Noting than Shannon defined information content for us with his work on Shannon entropy.
Sorry just had to reply to that one
It is too funny (for a math and physics nerd like me).Fitting to a trendline has no relationship to these fundamentals
I disagree. Risto specifically developed the trendline & formula to support the fundamentals in mind, ie. $300k USD/BTC for a fair price in the position of Bitcoin being a major facilitator of trade worldwide. Thus, the fitting has been rigged to match these perceived fundamentals. Given other projections, the trendline could be adjusted with an altered or altogether different formula, still seeming to "match perfectly" with the secular trend with constant deviations from the trendline.Thus, it all is to a large degree sleight of mind. The only aspect that is obvious for everyone is the exponential uphill. How steep in the big picture is anyone's guess. I consider Risto's version rather solid compromise, with a beautiful connection and parables to the laws of nature that govern this world (can't remember how or through whose arguments I came to this conclusion).
On a more esoteric angle, I personally believe the order and laws behind all natural phenomena can be successfully extrapolated to macro environments like collective valuation of financial instruments. I'm no specialist in TA but am inclined to think that's the particular point why Technical Analysis works.
Bitcoin price is a result of natural phenomena consisting of numerous layers of invisible laws of large numbers governing the average distribution of stuff. As such, the laws add up to a sort of very complex interference pattern that reveals a virtual image to an outside observer. A bit like Moire pattern:
See the whiteish - convex cylinder that comes up in the middle of the two large rings. That's a Moire pattern. If you examine it, it's not drawn anywhere and you will have to conclude it appears spontaneously, more likely unintended. Yet it's a very specific form arising out of the interaction of the properties of the two large red-blue rings.
If a guy has found such a pattern in Bitcoin price and made it visible from all the noise, and if that even somehow matches a long history up to this point, I'm going to listen to him very closely.
Remember; As above, so below.
CoinCube to the extent that needs to be the case, the collective/government can get funding from the physical economy that can't be anonymous.
I see some ying and yang balance ahead. It will sort itself out. There are no absolutes in the universe.
I see some ying and yang balance ahead. It will sort itself out. There are no absolutes in the universe.
Fair enough. Surprisingly I find myself converted.
Lead on AnonyMint I will follow you into the new world order
Devil is in the details. You should not accept a package without opening it to inspect the contents.
I am concerned about the governments' ability to censor internet packets to shutdown certain traffic. I believe there are counter-measures that simultaneously maintain robust anonymity.
P.S. I have adopted an Asian perspective to some degree so that might explain why you find some agreement with my posts.
He thinks the free market got it wrong. He thinks he's right, and everyone else is wrong. This is pretty typical of socialists.
A free market is competition. We have mania which is a manifestation of the same ignorance that drives socialism. See the upthread discussion between Impaler and myself. Even the Austrian economists have confirmed that Bitcoin is a mania Ponzi.
So you don't think that an anonymous coin that cannot be seized or frozen or tracked by the government will make taxes harder to collect? Sure government will still try and in some cases succeed but tax revenues are sure to decline if something like this takes off.
You're adding something when you say that it can't be seized.
To say it can't be seized implies that it can't be collected. I'd say that essentially begs the question.
CoinCube I suggest you ignore nonsense like this. It defies comprehension of decentralized crypto-currency.
So, if your question is whether or not I think that an anonymous coin that cannot be tracked (directly) by the government will make taxes harder to collect, my answer is not much. As I said, the US dollar already has these properties.
The government is phasing out cash, as I covered in my prior post.
Now whether anonymity will work reliably and whether the coin can't be shutdown by filtering at the routers controlled by the major governments is technical discussion that will have to wait until the details of such a coin are known.
CoinCube to the extent that needs to be the case, the collective/government can get funding from the physical economy that can't be anonymous.
I see some ying and yang balance ahead. It will sort itself out. There are no absolutes in the universe.
I see some ying and yang balance ahead. It will sort itself out. There are no absolutes in the universe.
Fair enough. Surprisingly I find myself converted.
Lead on AnonyMint I will follow you into the new world order
"Give me an example of something we need government for and I will explain why I think it can be done better by private enterprise and competition."
I'd say that's anarchist, not minarchist.
I'd say that's anarchist, not minarchist.
See my prior post where I see ying and yang and the balance will sort itself out. I don't strive for absolutes; they don't exist.
CoinCube to the extent that needs to be the case, the collective/government can get funding from the physical economy that can't be anonymous.
I see some ying and yang balance ahead. It will sort itself out. There are no absolutes in the universe.
I see some ying and yang balance ahead. It will sort itself out. There are no absolutes in the universe.
Jump to: