Topic: MasterCoin: New Protocol Layer Starting From “The Exodus Address” - page 145. (Read 448489 times)

I feel we must settle this once and for all before moving on, it's clearly the biggest point of controversy that we've had thus far. While I trust Willett's resolve will solve the problem, most here are not so convinced. We must think this through to a logical end.

"Why I trust Dacoinminster..." 

Related: How to Convince Investors

My reasons for investing in MasterCoin:

• I know & trust Dacoinminster to responsibly manage the funds and project management.
• I like the idea of an extra protocol layer encoded on top of Bitcoin, and I'd like to fund its research & development. I think the possibilities in such a layer are great, and perhaps other ideas not yet discussed will be the killer app of such a layer
• I like his bootstrapping method
• I think it might just be financially rewarding (but might not ... I believe in diversification)
• I haven't had a chance to read about the competing BitShares proposal ... I might invest in that in the future also, if there's an appropriate investment mechanism

That is impossible.
Unless you simply mean closing any fund which becomes underfunded.

The first coins I'm going to issue are "cruise to the moon" coins.

For when the concept of giving away something that doesn't have any means to exist yet just isn't enough?  

Surely this is too early!

Finally, what is the total number of MSc going to be anyway? Is this set in stone now (I can't see how it can be without a working prototype)? And if it is not, then what's the point of the Greasemonkey script? It may as well just say "you own an unknown % of a pie of unknown size". This is obviously relevant to any giveaway ;-)


(Don't get me wrong, I'm not against you or your project. I'm just trying to figure out if there is something I've missed, because from here this looks like a lot of people signing up for cruises to the Moon.)

How to enable betting without a trusted data feed or escrow agent.

1) Pick a subject you are going to bet on that has a boolean output and enough interest for a reasonable market:  "X will be the next American idol".  In theory you don't even need that deep of a market as long as you can find a counter party.
2) Negotiate (off chain) a transaction that takes inputs from both parties and creates 2 outputs each containing the full amount that can be spent conditionally based upon the outcome of the event.
3) Once a position is taken it can be transferred / sold.
4) Positions can be liquidated by settling up with someone of the opposite position.  So a winner & a loser must both sign the payout that closes the position.  Any winner can be paired with any looser for liquidation purposes.
5) Ensure everyone settles up using Nash Equilibrium, ie: every bet requires the better to put up 3x the bet amount and they get 2x back when the settle.

No scammer could profitably make bets and refuse to settle.  Ambiguous outcomes would force the market to adopt a fair payout ratio. And of course, there is some risk in waiting to settle because the last person to settle faces the risk of being matched against the crazies who would rather lose 3x than let someone else win 1x.    This will force rapid settlement once the outcome is clear with the losers who admit their defeat first lose less than those who hold on until the bitter end. 

With this system there is no price fixing nor trusted parties nor even a requirement for a data feed.    This is something that I will eventually work into BitShares.   

Do we have a timeline for when Mastercoins will be implemented to the point where betting is possible? When might these coins have a valuation? Thanks.

Having a great vacation; just have a moment online for a couple clarifications:

I've seen speculation that the project is changing direction (it is not) or that stabilized currencies are being dropped (they are not). Some parameters will be changed so that escrow funds are never under-funded, but I'm just as excited as ever to implement them.

MasterCoin's distributed being system requires bettors to trust their data source, but not each other. Calling it trust-based is misleading.

Nice to see that project funds are still rolling in. There will be a MasterCoin giveaway thread in a few days where I'll give away a few of my own MasterCoins. I have an interesting twist on the give-away concept which I'd like to try. It should get us a lot of attention. ;-)

Talk to you guys Monday!

I am very confused by the motives of people on this thread, especially everyone throwing money into this development fund.  I would really like to understand what everyone likes about MasterCoin and why so much time & money is being thrown at it.

  From the paper the goals are:  

Fix Instability & Insecurity - presumably this was supposed to be GoldCoin and other escrow-fund currencies that have had to be scrapped due to problems identified here.

Financially Benefit all Bitcoin Users - presumably through higher fees and demand for bitcoin as well as destruction of BTC and thus deflation.  Ignoring the financial cost of dust transactions.  This point is debatable.

Self Fund   - this is not a justification for funding it that would be circular reasoning.

Richly Reward Early Adopters  -  This would presumably be because of the value in Fixing Instability & Insecurity.   If it is because of the Self Funding or Financial Benefit to Bitcoin Users then it would be a ponzi scheme which I presume was not the intent.

False Assumptions:
Alternate block chains do not confuse the message... the community does not have a single message.

Removing GoldCoin (and other user currencies... what remains?)

1) Colored Coins backed by an issuer... already implemented elsewhere.
2) data feeds published in the blockchain... might as well post them someplace else... I guess they are used for bets.
3) Savings accounts which use time delay / spending restrictions... this has minimal value compared to alternatives (cold storage)
4) Marking an address as compromised...  this has some value, but nothing revolutionary.
5) Posting bids/asks on the blockchain -  because all data feeds are from an oracle, these bids/asks are better off negotiated off chain and only include the atomic trade on chain after all signatures are acquired.  
6) decentralized bets based upon built in data feeds... trusting the source of the feed.

All of the above features are not worth a dime absent the broken escrow fund system.   Furthermore, if you are going to have a 'public issuer' then it is far more efficient to use Open Transactions for both trades, transfers, and savings.  After all you are relying on trust and the government not to shut down the issuer.

All that is left is the decentralized betting system which is still trust-based and could also be managed using simple multi-sig transactions.

Now given the lack of valuable features without GoldCoin the only reason to invest is simply because you believe dacoinminster can eventually solve all problems and deliver you something valuable.  

Now... if dacoinminster was the only game in town then I could see investing with him, but I have far more robust and comprehensive solutions to everything dacoin has presented.  Any investment with dacoin is facing very stiff competition and it would be far better for both the investors and the community if everyone could put this same money toward the BitShares ecosystem.   So my question is this:  suppose I had an option to accept investment from the community for BitShares would there be any reason to put your money with dacoin vs BitShares?   Why would MasterCoin be more valuable than BitShares and on what grounds would it compete or have an advantage?  

All of this assumes BitShares works and if you reason for not considering BitShares is because you don't think it can work then I have a bounty up and will pay you to show me how and why it will not work.  

I suppose first and foremost, we should decide if the last part of the protocol is feasible. If not, I would suggest we start over with the fund since I don't think it'd be fair that the plans changed before August is even over, and people will have a chance to reevaluate what they want to invest. But that's definitely for discussion. If it is, then we carry on! We'll let J.R. explicate  to everyone what he has concluded during his 1 week moratorium.

Okay, I can see that your serious.

The "gold" is those early adopters who fund the project (become early share holders in the virtue company).

Did I get that right?
 
---

Here are two very real questions:

PREFACE: The United States has accumulated over $70 trillion in unreported debt, an amount nearly six times the declared figure, according to a new study by University of California-San Diego economics Professor James Hamilton.

Here is question #1: What will prevent Master-Coin from being revalued?

One day we might read a headline like this:
"Master-Coin ownership just jumped from its starting value of 1 trillion to 70 trillion overnight."

And as we read into the story find this:
"Today 69 new bitcoins that funded MasterCion prior to it's official launch were discovered thus undermining the value of the original investors thought they held."

Here is question #2: What will insure Master-Coin is revalued upward?

Reasonable speaking, what kind of return does an early adopter have to gain?
(... and how might you better insure against any loses with some other alternative ALT.COIN?)

/unSpy

p.s. One more thought, it would seems to me that LiteCoin or FeatherCoin could sell themselves as insurance against a counter-party should bitcoin fail in some way. That if were to happen, your Master-Coin protocol could sit atop their blockchain just as well, or could be switch over to that blockchain should thee need arise. This begs the question, couldn't a future ALT.COIN creator ensure the value of his new virtual currency by linking isn't value to Master-Coin even it his new virtual currency deviated from the Bitcoin standard? If so, how would this be done? What unintended consequences might result?

 

If it hasn't been mentioned a bounty for a professionally designed logo/graphic profile would prob be a good idea. Maybe a designer would let this thread vote on a few suggestions.

Bounty suggestion: Create a website for mastercoin.org
Please discuss on the google group.

(Rolls dice)

That's why I said Willet should have a discretionary fund that he can use without asking us.
We should guard the large pool of money, but should simultaneously not slow him down in the day-to-day operations.

FYI, regarding transparency, I opened this Trello Board, and I propose that project-level tasks be handled via this board.

If you want to help organize the MasterCoin project, feel free to ask for an invite and I'll add you to the board.
(It's public as read-only, you should be able to vote on cards if you're logged in to Trello even without an invite).

That's why I'd like to communicate as openly as possible to mitigate against parties acting only in their own self interest.

I have a real concern the "board" will wind up with these little micromanaging tasks when really the point of the board should be to take broad authority where it conflicts with his own interest away from JR.