If you use a side-chain through IOC, how would another chain be maintained? If the block-chain integrity is dependent upon the chain constantly being updated through either mining or staking, each chain would have to have a mechanism to build the chain constantly, would it not? Would a chain that was created to store data for a company that only used a few nodes not be any different than a server? (not criticizing, just wanting to learn)
Would IOC perform that function through the constant transactions on the main chain?
If that is the case, then the buy-in mechanism is the need to purchase an alias and have a wallet operating, correct?
Just asking because in all these coins, there is the constant push and pull of liquidity and scarcity that drives the prices. Most coins do not end up with a constant driver for money to come into the coin.
It would seem that you guys are approaching that balance with a real application for the coin. I am just unsure of how that plays out in the long run, especially if the idea takes off. Having a little trouble seeing 16 million people buying into the coin, so I do not think you will get to a Bitcoin type price as a buy-in for the service, although that would be great.
Is the idea behind the foundation to have a governing body to make decisions like price point, if this coin does take off like that? This way a consensus is reached for altering price instead of one or two people controlling it?
I know you are busy, won't be disappointed if this does not get answered. Just thinking out loud with the intent to learn something new.
Thanks for your hard work and vision, best of luck.
Hi,
Any other chain should be maintained by the 'owner' of that chain. We think that there will be chains all over the world with a specific cause. Like a coca-cola chain for administration purposes for the logistic process for example. If they need to interoperate with the BTC chain, they can use Chameleon. To use Chameleon they would need to pay a small fee in IOC. So they need to buy IOC in order to pay for the service. Coca-cola will need to keep their chain up in a way they want. Maybe by miners all over the world, or they want it rather closed with nodes that they control.
Next to that if businesses that dont have their own chain but want to use messaging, alias and small data storage in our main chain, they need to have IOC to pay for the fees. All fees collected will be redistributed amongst the stakers in the network. Not the team!! Everything flows back to the holders.
How it plays out in the long run? I wish i knew. ;-)
Because the software of Chameleon and the IOC chain will be acting like a "middle man" in the future, we need to make sure companies (like that coca-cola example) trust us. They want to build their services on top of our technology. If we would be a commercial company then a large bank could buy our technology. With that in mind businesses don't like to participate. We are a foundation just because we want to have the trust of those companies. With a foundation there is no external party that can buy us out or buy the technology. They can collaborate with us.
The foundation board is represented with the founders and financers of the I/O Digital project to ensure our thoughts are represented when new people come in as a member for example.
I hope this explains a bit why we have set this up.
Richard