Topic: Ideas for more efficient distribution of money? - page 4. (Read 13275 times)
All fiat started out being extremely centralized, first going to the central bankers, and then to private bankers, before finally getting down to the users. How was USD initially distributed and dispersed? Maybe you can follow that model.
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.
"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"
There were many economic theories throughout history of human thought. The prevailing theory and most researched one in economics nowadays is the subjective theory of value where the notion of "intrinsic value" has no meaning...
Economists are like antithesis-of-assholes, everyone thinks they have one.
The concept of subjective value is dubious or incomplete, because economists can't even holistically incorporate marginal, market price in a universal model.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_(economics)
In short, trust those who do, not those who pontificate. So finance wins over (inconsistent) theory.
http://unheresy.com/Information%20Is%20Alive.html#Knowledge_Anneals
Quote
Knowledge Anneals
Unsophisticated thinkers have an incorrect understanding of knowledge creation, idolizing a well-structured top-down sparkling academic cathedral of vastly superior theoretical minds. Rather knowledge primary spawns from accretive learning due to unexpected random chaotic fitness created from multitudes of random path dependencies that can only exist in the bottom-up free market. Top-down systems are inherently fragile because they overcommit to egregious error (link to Taleb's simplest summary of the math).
Unsophisticated thinkers have an incorrect understanding of knowledge creation, idolizing a well-structured top-down sparkling academic cathedral of vastly superior theoretical minds. Rather knowledge primary spawns from accretive learning due to unexpected random chaotic fitness created from multitudes of random path dependencies that can only exist in the bottom-up free market. Top-down systems are inherently fragile because they overcommit to egregious error (link to Taleb's simplest summary of the math).
Wherever they ran, they paid and were paid with money. They didn't quit their jobs, so we have to admit they didn't lose confidence, right?
They may have no other job offer.
Nope. It just means they still have confidence in the system (at least some of them), plain and simple. If they didn't, it would mean the money completely had lost its exchange value, i.e. ceased to be money, so no more sense to work. Direct inference from your assertion ("intrinsic value of fiat relies on society maintaining confidence in its government and financial system")...
You assume a world of 0 friction where change happens instantly. If change happened instantly there would be no change, the end game would already be the present and the past. Friction (inertia) and (the existence of) time are inseparable. Without friction there would be no past, present, or future. These are the sort of deep insights on my blog:
http://unheresy.com/
If you want efficient distribution of money in an altcoin, do the following:
1. Use a mining algorithm that doesn't reward specialized equipment, because that makes mining a specialized business that only rich people will do.
2. Abandon the idea of a fixed finite amount of eventual coin. Instead, increase mining rewards by 5% every year. In the very long run, you can build a very healthy economy with 5% inflation. Value will fluctuate wildly in the adoption phase, but eventually you get 5% inflation.
3. Fix it so mining rewards are not so concentrated. Every block should reward hundreds, maybe even thousands, of people with small awards. Not by making "pools" but directly. Make mining reward "near misses."
4. 5% inflation, when finally achieved, progressively devalues any money that is just hoarded. That includes the highly disproportionate rewards held by the very early adopters. There's a motive to spend it, possibly to capitalize new businesses.
Now, if you do this, you will *still* get a wealthy elite. But it'll be a wealthy elite who have to get that way by managing their money and investing wisely, rather than just buying in early.
1. Use a mining algorithm that doesn't reward specialized equipment, because that makes mining a specialized business that only rich people will do.
2. Abandon the idea of a fixed finite amount of eventual coin. Instead, increase mining rewards by 5% every year. In the very long run, you can build a very healthy economy with 5% inflation. Value will fluctuate wildly in the adoption phase, but eventually you get 5% inflation.
3. Fix it so mining rewards are not so concentrated. Every block should reward hundreds, maybe even thousands, of people with small awards. Not by making "pools" but directly. Make mining reward "near misses."
4. 5% inflation, when finally achieved, progressively devalues any money that is just hoarded. That includes the highly disproportionate rewards held by the very early adopters. There's a motive to spend it, possibly to capitalize new businesses.
Now, if you do this, you will *still* get a wealthy elite. But it'll be a wealthy elite who have to get that way by managing their money and investing wisely, rather than just buying in early.
Why are you telling them our altcoin design?
You agreed to keep it secret until release, or did you forget! <- joke The idea of bitcoin distribution is not to hand them out as broadly as possible. It is a system to reward people who run their computers to help secure and operate the network. It is not a free lunch program. Miners do work and are paid for it.
1. Distribution of coin rewards is halving every 4 years, thus diminishing towards 0. Half of all coins went to adopters in first 4 years.
2. ASICs means PC owners can't leverage their existing assets. Thus not a widely distribution coin.
3. PC mining need not be a free lunch, could also secure the network.
1. True. Those who act first are more greatly rewarded. Welcome to economics.
In the future fees will replace block rewards. They will also go to those who work hardest and smartest.
"Welcome to economics" is 0 information content comment. Many things are economics, including perpetual coin rewards, which have all the advantages and none of the disadvantages. I have covered this extensively in my posts over the past weeks, and I am not going to re-summarize. It is up to you if you want to research them or not. Transaction fees are failure due to Transaction Withholding Attack, Spiraling Transactions Fees, and because the coin isn't distributed to the 97% for spending and the 3% power-law hoarders aren't continually debased (as it must be for a society to not hit gridlock).
2. True. They must buy ASICs. Just as the last generation of miners needed to buy GPU's and before that, powerful CPUs. Miners must spend money on equipment and electricity. You can't pan for gold anymore either, now you must invest in expensive equipment.
And it doesn't have to be that way. Soon they will only need to buy DRAM, if they don't already have enough. A powerful CPU will help, but not having one won't prevent one from mining something.
DRAM is for sale every where, unlike ASICs which are difficult to obtain. I can't buy an ASIC at my local electronics or computer store.
The high DRAM requirement is necessary to eliminate the threat of Botnets. It also means that any zombie bots will freeze up for their user or the proof-of-work output of the bot will be so incredibly low so as to render the few such bots the botnet has (percentage wise) to be insignificant to the network hashrate.
You may have noticed I purposely ignored a post upthread about (Sparc and) Tilera CPUs.
3. PC mining was fine for protecting a market cap in the millions, but it is far to weak for the billions we are at now. This scaling acts against the profitability of a 51% attack.
It is not the hashrate that indicates the security, but rather the cost of attaining 50+% (51% is technically incorrect) of the hashrate. Much more plausible for a deep pocketed entity person to corner the market on ASICs than to corner the market on PCs.
Bitcoin is market driven. It rewards hard work, capital investment and greed, but nothing else.
P.S. I'm glad you are a contrarian. We need more than one uni-brain here.
P.S. I'm glad you are a contrarian. We need more than one uni-brain here.
And competition against Bitcoin. Which I think will be increasing.
And the above is not the only "ace up the sleeve" secret that is lurking and coming against Bitcoin.
All who want to work on such an altcoin and be paid well for doing so will get that chance. This will not remain closed-source for long.
If you want efficient distribution of money in an altcoin, do the following:
1. Use a mining algorithm that doesn't reward specialized equipment, because that makes mining a specialized business that only rich people will do.
2. Abandon the idea of a fixed finite amount of eventual coin. Instead, increase mining rewards by 5% every year. In the very long run, you can build a very healthy economy with 5% inflation. Value will fluctuate wildly in the adoption phase, but eventually you get 5% inflation.
3. Fix it so mining rewards are not so concentrated. Every block should reward hundreds, maybe even thousands, of people with small awards. Not by making "pools" but directly. Make mining reward "near misses."
4. 5% inflation, when finally achieved, progressively devalues any money that is just hoarded. That includes the highly disproportionate rewards held by the very early adopters. There's a motive to spend it, possibly to capitalize new businesses.
Now, if you do this, you will *still* get a wealthy elite. But it'll be a wealthy elite who have to get that way by managing their money and investing wisely, rather than just buying in early.
1. Use a mining algorithm that doesn't reward specialized equipment, because that makes mining a specialized business that only rich people will do.
2. Abandon the idea of a fixed finite amount of eventual coin. Instead, increase mining rewards by 5% every year. In the very long run, you can build a very healthy economy with 5% inflation. Value will fluctuate wildly in the adoption phase, but eventually you get 5% inflation.
3. Fix it so mining rewards are not so concentrated. Every block should reward hundreds, maybe even thousands, of people with small awards. Not by making "pools" but directly. Make mining reward "near misses."
4. 5% inflation, when finally achieved, progressively devalues any money that is just hoarded. That includes the highly disproportionate rewards held by the very early adopters. There's a motive to spend it, possibly to capitalize new businesses.
Now, if you do this, you will *still* get a wealthy elite. But it'll be a wealthy elite who have to get that way by managing their money and investing wisely, rather than just buying in early.
AnonyMint is the first person I have seen get ignored for posting annoyingly strong arguments in an arrogant manner. Lots of people have thin skins.
Personally I make an effort to seek out his posts.
Personally I make an effort to seek out his posts.
They are not actually that strong, but this is just my opinion and your choice indeed. Also he is known for deleting posts (his own and the replies to them) where he had been proven flat-out wrong. I guess that's why he has a high ignore score...
I deleted my own posts either because they were not on topic, or more importantly I've deleted them because they contained evidence and technical clues of what I am working on!
They are not actually that strong, but this is just my opinion and your choice indeed. Also he is known for deleting posts (his own and the replies to them) where he had been proven flat-out wrong. I guess that's why he has a high ignore score...
Focus on the message rather then the messenger.
At the very least AnonyMints arguments are novel and interesting.
The possibility exists that (although most of us would hate to admit it) that he is correct.
I don't think you would love your messages being deleted...
I only deleted one message in this thread accidentally from someone who in the prior post had said he was taunting me. Thus I thought his one sentence quip was off-topic. After I clicked, I realized he had a valid point and so I wrote a post acknowledging his point, which he confirmed in another post.
I deleted many messages in the ponzi thread, for the valid reason I stated in the last post of the thread, which provides a link to the alternative thread of the same title, where all can repost their deleted messages (deleted messages are sent to your PM inbox so easy to copy+paste).
I blast my mouth because I am extremely (99+%) confident about my insight. I am slightly less confident about my ability to implement my insights, yet on the order of 80% confidence.
I'm sure if this quote below is true; Ill look more favorably on Christians, when I no longer feel enslaved. Thanks Bitcoin.
You do know the Bible condones slavery as necessary form of rehabilitation of those who were not wise.
My point is the people clicking ignore on me are going to eat humble pie.
And I mean that literally, as this is not going to some symbolic victory, but a tangible one I will hold in my hands.
I consider it the most noble thing to do is to tell everyone roughly how I am going to defeat and give them every opportunity to benefit, and watch them do exactly the opposite because their ego is bigger than mine and blinds them.
I eat ignores as motivation. Please give me the ignore championship. I am going to work even harder to win.
It is not easy to see yourself, but your ignore button has reached its maximum color 
AnonyMint is the first person I have seen get ignored for posting annoyingly strong arguments in an arrogant manner. Lots of people have thin skins.
Personally I make an effort to seek out his posts.
I post arrogantly because I am so sick of the disrespect such as when I was trying to be unemotional in the Problem with Altcoins thread and received this comment from Rassah:
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.3525396
Quote from: Rassah
My apologies, I did not realize that you were a crazy person. Cary on.
I realized what some of those who are silent think about me. So I figured if they are going to think that about me, might as well tell them what I think about them = Bitard.
My arrogance is not directed at CoinCube, nor anyone else who is reasonable.
People who know me, know me as a jovial and caring person, almost to the point of seeming to be female.
But I have a competitive fire like Michael Jordan. If you incite my fire, I won't sleep until I win.
Congrats you have turned on my fire. Thank you. It is the best gift I could receive from this forum.
What you are reading as arrogance, is my testosterone climbing through the roof. I literally had to go to the basketball court and play at 2pm in 35C and 90% humidity to calm myself down.
They are not actually that strong, but this is just my opinion and your choice indeed. Also he is known for deleting posts (his own and the replies to them) where he had been proven flat-out wrong. I guess that's why he has a high ignore score...
Focus on the message rather then the messenger.
At the very least AnonyMints arguments are novel and interesting.
The possibility exists that (although most of us would hate to admit it) that he is correct.
I don't think you would love your messages being deleted...
Unemployment figures tell us that we haven't yet even started...
Speak for yourself, when you no longer qualify as unemployed they don't count you anymore.
You seem to be missing the whole thing we're talking about. It doesn't matter whether you qualify as unemployed or not, what matters here is your conscious reluctance or unwillingness to work since you are being paid with what you don't consider any longer as money. If so, you wouldn't give a damn if they counted you or not. That was the point we were discussing. Involuntary unemployment is beyond the scope of this discussion...
But if you personally think dollars have already become trash, I don't mind you sending them all to me!
They are not actually that strong, but this is just my opinion and your choice indeed. Also he is known for deleting posts (his own and the replies to them) where he had been proven flat-out wrong. I guess that's why he has a high ignore score...
Focus on the message rather then the messenger.
At the very least AnonyMints arguments are novel and interesting.
The possibility exists that (although most of us would hate to admit it) that he is correct.
Nope. It just means they still have confidence in the system, plain and simple. If they didn't, it would mean the money completely lost its exchange value, i.e. ceased to be money, so no more sense to work. Direct inference from your assertion ("intrinsic value of fiat relies on society maintaining confidence in its government and financial system")...
and we are not there yet?
Unemployment figures tell us that we haven't yet even started...
Speak for yourself, when you no longer qualify as unemployed they don't count you anymore.
Anyway, just been skimming these posts and realised I've been hanging out a lot in the speculation threads for so long I forgot it's not just about Bitcoin but ego. Anyway carry on as you were I'm sure no one is missing me.
Just a friendly observation though not directed at anyone, Bitcoin is working, despite all the reasons it shouldn't.
I think the high price really ups the ante when making an argument.
I'm sure if this quote below is true; Ill look more favorably on Christians, when I no longer feel enslaved. Thanks Bitcoin.
You do know the Bible condones slavery as necessary form of rehabilitation of those who were not wise.
Nope. It just means they still have confidence in the system, plain and simple. If they didn't, it would mean the money completely lost its exchange value, i.e. ceased to be money, so no more sense to work. Direct inference from your assertion ("intrinsic value of fiat relies on society maintaining confidence in its government and financial system")...
and we are not there yet?
Unemployment figures tell us that we haven't yet even started... Actually, we were talking about Weimar Germany and its hyperinflation of 1922-1923
AnonyMint is the first person I have seen get ignored for posting annoyingly strong arguments in an arrogant manner. Lots of people have thin skins.
Personally I make an effort to seek out his posts.
Personally I make an effort to seek out his posts.
They are not actually that strong, but this is just my opinion and your choice indeed. Also he is known for deleting posts (his own and the replies to them) where he had been proven flat-out wrong. I guess that's why he has a high ignore score...
You do know the Bible condones slavery as necessary form of rehabilitation of those who were not wise.
No but that is great, for me and nice to know God has a place for those "not wise" dogmatic Keynesians
Nope. In a housing bubble new buyers are required to continually enter the market and buy new homes lest the bubble should burst, but this doesn't make it a Ponzi scheme. New debt being created continually makes it a debt bubble. The debt bubble popping may actually cause an economic collapse, but the possibility of it doesn't make a debt based fiat system a Ponzi either. You're just using the wrong term here...
I had taken this position recently, but I said "yes" upthread because I was remembering the notion (is it true?) that all fiat currencies have returned to their intrinsic value of 0 on long enough time scales.
To say that all fiat currencies have returned to their intrinsic value of 0 on long enough time distance is equal to saying that all states have to die sooner or later. Historically, this is a well-grounded stance (even without making provisions for fiat currencies), but you should be very careful about the cause and effect relationship and the sequence of events...
Nope. It just means they still have confidence in the system, plain and simple. If they didn't, it would mean the money completely lost its exchange value, i.e. ceased to be money, so no more sense to work. Direct inference from your assertion ("intrinsic value of fiat relies on society maintaining confidence in its government and financial system")...
and we are not there yet?
Personally the OP has a legitimate concern; honestly I think Bitcoin is doing a better (more equitable) job of disseminating currency than fiat from our Government / Bank Partnerships.
At the end of the day I like the fact that huge amounts of Bitcoin sit in cold storage, the first fork to deviate will encore high inflation, as old coins flood the new fork while still remaining in cold storage with potentual in the stronger fork. (ie - old coins could spend in both forks)
It is not easy to see yourself, but your ignore button has reached its maximum color
AnonyMint is the first person I have seen get ignored for posting annoyingly strong arguments in an arrogant manner. Lots of people have thin skins.
Personally I make an effort to seek out his posts.
Wherever they ran, they paid and were paid with money. They didn't quit their jobs, so we have to admit they didn't lose confidence, right?
They may have no other job offer.
Nope. It just means they still have confidence in the system (at least some of them), plain and simple. If they didn't, it would mean the money completely had lost its exchange value, i.e. ceased to be money, so no more sense to work. Direct inference from your assertion ("intrinsic value of fiat relies on society maintaining confidence in its government and financial system")...
Jump to: