Yes, I'm here
We're still looking for a lead dev, there's someone _ingsoc wants me to meet soon
Although 0.4 is considered more or less "final" at this point, I've been musing over some changes, namely,
1.) Forking primecoin and using that hash/prime algorithm for mining.
2.) Establishing a peer-to-peer marketplace within the chain itself for people to exchange coins and goods. I have a pretty good idea how to do this after thinking about it for the past two weeks, and I'll probably write something up soon.
If you're interested in being a lead dev, just e-mail me at [email protected] with a resume + CV, I'd love to hear from you
Topic: MC2: A cryptocurrency based on a hybrid PoW/PoS system - page 14. (Read 195188 times)
No update, unfortunately
Or at least a one month outlook? There was momentum. Now it appears to be completely halted. However Tacos been online
No update, unfortunately
This project is definitely the most interesting altcoin in my opinion, can't wait for dev to start! Would offer help but I'm not experienced enough in this kind of thing.
Would breaking the project into stages help with development?
It may not be realistic to expect developers to commit to a long term project.
Netcoin has a number of independent features.
They don't have to all be implemented at once.
They could be broken up into a series of short-term projects with readily obtainable endpoints.
What if we released many separate altcoins as described below:
1a) Acoin = Coin with feature A implemented
1b) Bcoin = Coin with feature B implemented
...
1f) Fcoin = Coin with feature F implemented
2ab) ABcoin = Coin with feature A and feature B implemented
3abc) ABCcoin = Coin with feature A and feature B and feature C implemented
...
X) ABCDEF...Coin with all desired features implemented
The releases would be obtainable milestones for the larger project (ABCDEF..).
Just a single tangible release would do a lot to attract developer interest.
We could partially grandfather in the existing owners of previous editions via premine, providing an
incentive to invest in the projects' early stages.
e.g. 10% of AB coin goes to owners of A coin, 10% of B coin goes to owners of B coin, and 80% is generated by new miners.
Do we have at least one developer who is interested in actually working on this?
It may not be realistic to expect developers to commit to a long term project.
Netcoin has a number of independent features.
They don't have to all be implemented at once.
They could be broken up into a series of short-term projects with readily obtainable endpoints.
What if we released many separate altcoins as described below:
1a) Acoin = Coin with feature A implemented
1b) Bcoin = Coin with feature B implemented
...
1f) Fcoin = Coin with feature F implemented
2ab) ABcoin = Coin with feature A and feature B implemented
3abc) ABCcoin = Coin with feature A and feature B and feature C implemented
...
X) ABCDEF...Coin with all desired features implemented
The releases would be obtainable milestones for the larger project (ABCDEF..).
Just a single tangible release would do a lot to attract developer interest.
We could partially grandfather in the existing owners of previous editions via premine, providing an
incentive to invest in the projects' early stages.
e.g. 10% of AB coin goes to owners of A coin, 10% of B coin goes to owners of B coin, and 80% is generated by new miners.
Do we have at least one developer who is interested in actually working on this?
Set it up where there are milestones. Set a list of priorities and fund development according to those priorities.
Adding a bunch of altcoins will just generate confusion though. Have Netcoin be the umbrella project which the subprojects are under and in my opinion let Netcoin be the only altcoin, unless you're talking about a testnet or simulation.
I think if you have enough funding its not hard to get developer interest. Its hard when you only have a blueprint because no one wants to be the developer to start the process.
Yeah there's no point in creating a bunch of semi okay alt coins. Alt coins need to be made with a clear goal, and it should be completed. You need to support that one coin, unless you're talking about testnets with no value. I just think its not a good idea.
Meeting tonight with a potential dev
Good news
Meeting tonight with a potential dev
Nice! awesome job taco, i'm really excited about this!
Meeting tonight with a potential dev
Status update please?
Would breaking the project into stages help with development?
It may not be realistic to expect developers to commit to a long term project.
Netcoin has a number of independent features.
They don't have to all be implemented at once.
They could be broken up into a series of short-term projects with readily obtainable endpoints.
What if we released many separate altcoins as described below:
1a) Acoin = Coin with feature A implemented
1b) Bcoin = Coin with feature B implemented
...
1f) Fcoin = Coin with feature F implemented
2ab) ABcoin = Coin with feature A and feature B implemented
3abc) ABCcoin = Coin with feature A and feature B and feature C implemented
...
X) ABCDEF...Coin with all desired features implemented
The releases would be obtainable milestones for the larger project (ABCDEF..).
Just a single tangible release would do a lot to attract developer interest.
We could partially grandfather in the existing owners of previous editions via premine, providing an
incentive to invest in the projects' early stages.
e.g. 10% of AB coin goes to owners of A coin, 10% of B coin goes to owners of B coin, and 80% is generated by new miners.
Do we have at least one developer who is interested in actually working on this?
It may not be realistic to expect developers to commit to a long term project.
Netcoin has a number of independent features.
They don't have to all be implemented at once.
They could be broken up into a series of short-term projects with readily obtainable endpoints.
What if we released many separate altcoins as described below:
1a) Acoin = Coin with feature A implemented
1b) Bcoin = Coin with feature B implemented
...
1f) Fcoin = Coin with feature F implemented
2ab) ABcoin = Coin with feature A and feature B implemented
3abc) ABCcoin = Coin with feature A and feature B and feature C implemented
...
X) ABCDEF...Coin with all desired features implemented
The releases would be obtainable milestones for the larger project (ABCDEF..).
Just a single tangible release would do a lot to attract developer interest.
We could partially grandfather in the existing owners of previous editions via premine, providing an
incentive to invest in the projects' early stages.
e.g. 10% of AB coin goes to owners of A coin, 10% of B coin goes to owners of B coin, and 80% is generated by new miners.
Do we have at least one developer who is interested in actually working on this?
Set it up where there are milestones. Set a list of priorities and fund development according to those priorities.
Adding a bunch of altcoins will just generate confusion though. Have Netcoin be the umbrella project which the subprojects are under and in my opinion let Netcoin be the only altcoin, unless you're talking about a testnet or simulation.
I think if you have enough funding its not hard to get developer interest. Its hard when you only have a blueprint because no one wants to be the developer to start the process.
Would breaking the project into stages help with development?
It may not be realistic to expect developers to commit to a long term project.
Netcoin has a number of independent features.
They don't have to all be implemented at once.
They could be broken up into a series of short-term projects with readily obtainable endpoints.
What if we released many separate altcoins as described below:
1a) Acoin = Coin with feature A implemented
1b) Bcoin = Coin with feature B implemented
...
1f) Fcoin = Coin with feature F implemented
2ab) ABcoin = Coin with feature A and feature B implemented
3abc) ABCcoin = Coin with feature A and feature B and feature C implemented
...
X) ABCDEF...Coin with all desired features implemented
The releases would be obtainable milestones for the larger project (ABCDEF..).
Just a single tangible release would do a lot to attract developer interest.
We could partially grandfather in the existing owners of previous editions via premine, providing an
incentive to invest in the projects' early stages.
e.g. 10% of AB coin goes to owners of A coin, 10% of B coin goes to owners of B coin, and 80% is generated by new miners.
Do we have at least one developer who is interested in actually working on this?
It may not be realistic to expect developers to commit to a long term project.
Netcoin has a number of independent features.
They don't have to all be implemented at once.
They could be broken up into a series of short-term projects with readily obtainable endpoints.
What if we released many separate altcoins as described below:
1a) Acoin = Coin with feature A implemented
1b) Bcoin = Coin with feature B implemented
...
1f) Fcoin = Coin with feature F implemented
2ab) ABcoin = Coin with feature A and feature B implemented
3abc) ABCcoin = Coin with feature A and feature B and feature C implemented
...
X) ABCDEF...Coin with all desired features implemented
The releases would be obtainable milestones for the larger project (ABCDEF..).
Just a single tangible release would do a lot to attract developer interest.
We could partially grandfather in the existing owners of previous editions via premine, providing an
incentive to invest in the projects' early stages.
e.g. 10% of AB coin goes to owners of A coin, 10% of B coin goes to owners of B coin, and 80% is generated by new miners.
Do we have at least one developer who is interested in actually working on this?
I won't quote the whole text:
Results:
Profits of MtGox, BitPay, and Bitcoinica -> return for Low risk Investors and high risk Speculators
Fees for using, exchanging, accepting cryptocurrency go from monopoly/oligopoly level -> perfectly competitive level (near 0)
Risk of losing assets if MtGox, BitPay, Bitcoinica go bankrupt, go dishonest, get shutdown go from substantial -> nonexistent
Biggest criticism of bitcoin (huge price risks faced by users) mandatory -> optional
Does that answer your question why?
Yes it does, I can see now why having a hypervolatile derivative would be useful for maintaining your value over the course of say a day, long enough for you to cash out or such. It also solves the problem of the middle man. Thanks.
Results:
Profits of MtGox, BitPay, and Bitcoinica -> return for Low risk Investors and high risk Speculators
Fees for using, exchanging, accepting cryptocurrency go from monopoly/oligopoly level -> perfectly competitive level (near 0)
Risk of losing assets if MtGox, BitPay, Bitcoinica go bankrupt, go dishonest, get shutdown go from substantial -> nonexistent
Biggest criticism of bitcoin (huge price risks faced by users) mandatory -> optional
Does that answer your question why?
Yes it does, I can see now why having a hypervolatile derivative would be useful for maintaining your value over the course of say a day, long enough for you to cash out or such. It also solves the problem of the middle man. Thanks.
Okay, cunicula. So the idea here is that you have an interblock floating interest rate based on the market value of these coins? Is that correct? And this is used to make gradual corrections to line up market value with some existing fiat currency, such as the USD?
One potential problem is that the market value of coins can move a ton based on external interest, market manipulation, etc. For example, someone wants to buy 10m USD of these coins. If these coins are not available at the target value of 1 USD or close to that, it will spike the price. Furthermore, making lots of incremental interest rate changes is a slow process and will not be able to cope with value swings like a factor of 2 increase over a few days.
Another, more explicit, example of why there could be problems with small adjustments: 30k blocks in 7 months means a block every 10 minutes. If the market price doubles over 3 days, it will take a long time to adjust. Could this be a problem with maintaining a good medium for exchange? That there's lots of ways people can game it?
One potential problem is that the market value of coins can move a ton based on external interest, market manipulation, etc. For example, someone wants to buy 10m USD of these coins. If these coins are not available at the target value of 1 USD or close to that, it will spike the price. Furthermore, making lots of incremental interest rate changes is a slow process and will not be able to cope with value swings like a factor of 2 increase over a few days.
Another, more explicit, example of why there could be problems with small adjustments: 30k blocks in 7 months means a block every 10 minutes. If the market price doubles over 3 days, it will take a long time to adjust. Could this be a problem with maintaining a good medium for exchange? That there's lots of ways people can game it?
The USDcoin are not instantaneously convertible.
If "the expected backing ratio in 7 months is equal to 1," then the system cannot be gamed.
Moreover, if this is the case, the current backing ratio is almost irrelevant to the current price.
i.e. the market price of 50% backed USDcoin and 200% backed USDcoin should be almost the same.
Both 50% backed USDcoin and 200% backed USDcoin revert to being 100% backed USDcoin after about 40 days.
Here is a graph simulating how the USD backing would change in response to price in this system.
The interest rate changes are based on a simple algorithm rather than manual intervention.
(algorithm essentially targets 30 day convergence with 1 to 1 backing and slows down when backing is within 20% of parity to prevent overshooting)
Presumably real people would adjust interest rates using similar principles.
http://imgur.com/dJ2ekUu
The x axis is in days. You can see that the backing level bounces around 1, but gets knocked off by large price changes. The largest deviation is on day 1, where the backing level is set to be 0.05 USD per USDcoin and the initial interest rate is set to 0.
You can see that recovery to 1 USD per USDcoin takes about 3 months. The fact that the backing level was initially just 0.05 USD per USD coin does not help you predict waht the backing level will be on day 210. On day 210, this turns out to be 2.39 USD per USD coin. And on day 420, 0.57 USD per USD coin. And on day 630, 1.02 USD per USD coin. And on day 840, 0.96 USD per USD coin. And on Day 1050, 1.08 USD per USDcoin.
The point is that the current backing ratio != the expected backing level you are able to exchange at.
At all times, the expected backing ratio you are able to exchange at ~= 1.
Based on the current and past backing levels / prices, what is your forecast of the USD backing level 210 days in the future? Without being able to guess future price movements, could you make a guess of the future backing ratio that is better than 1?
If not, then you don't need to worry about gaming.
Finally, is this supposed to mimic the debt/bond system of the USD in some way?
Not sure exactly what you mean. 
Okay, cunicula. So the idea here is that you have an interblock floating interest rate based on the market value of these coins? Is that correct? And this is used to make gradual corrections to line up market value with some existing fiat currency, such as the USD?
One potential problem is that the market value of coins can move a ton based on external interest, market manipulation, etc. For example, someone wants to buy 10m USD of these coins. If these coins are not available at the target value of 1 USD or close to that, it will spike the price. Furthermore, making lots of incremental interest rate changes is a slow process and will not be able to cope with value swings like a factor of 2 increase over a few days.
Another, more explicit, example of why there could be problems with small adjustments: 30k blocks in 7 months means a block every 10 minutes. If the market price doubles over 3 days, it will take a long time to adjust. Could this be a problem with maintaining a good medium for exchange? That there's lots of ways people can game it?
Finally, is this supposed to mimic the debt/bond system of the USD in some way?
One potential problem is that the market value of coins can move a ton based on external interest, market manipulation, etc. For example, someone wants to buy 10m USD of these coins. If these coins are not available at the target value of 1 USD or close to that, it will spike the price. Furthermore, making lots of incremental interest rate changes is a slow process and will not be able to cope with value swings like a factor of 2 increase over a few days.
Another, more explicit, example of why there could be problems with small adjustments: 30k blocks in 7 months means a block every 10 minutes. If the market price doubles over 3 days, it will take a long time to adjust. Could this be a problem with maintaining a good medium for exchange? That there's lots of ways people can game it?
Finally, is this supposed to mimic the debt/bond system of the USD in some way?
Be nice, guys.
If you still see a problem, outline it explicitly so I can address it. I laid out everything in mathematical detail.
You suggested there was a problem (likely a figment of your imagination) and then asked me to guess what you might be imagining. This is not productive. If you are so confident, say something specific.
So afterwards you say you'll add PoS mining to keep stake in check (consequently keeping supply/demand honest) and yet I also have no idea what I'm talking about...interesting.
Anyways...
Do you have any specific knowledge to share with us? I'm challenging you to come up with something here.
... I thought not.
I see logic isn't your strong suit. Or did Netcoin acquire trolls on the dev team and I just missed the ANN?
Or maybe you're just having a bad day? Yes, this is definitely not productive. I'm glad there's an ignore button.
Actually, yes I am having a very bad day.
If you still see a problem, outline it explicitly so I can address it. I laid out everything in mathematical detail.
You suggested there was a problem (likely a figment of your imagination) and then asked me to guess what you might be imagining. This is not productive. If you are so confident, say something specific.
So afterwards you say you'll add PoS mining to keep stake in check (consequently keeping supply/demand honest) and yet I also have no idea what I'm talking about...interesting.
Anyways...
Do you have any specific knowledge to share with us? I'm challenging you to come up with something here.
... I thought not.
I see logic isn't your strong suit. Or did Netcoin acquire trolls on the dev team and I just missed the ANN?
Or maybe you're just having a bad day? Yes, this is definitely not productive. I'm glad there's an ignore button.
First off, no, basecoin would be equity in the basecoin network just like bitcoin is equity in the bitcoin network. It has no intrinsic value or link to a real world value.
More importantly, you may have missed 7 month delay part as described below:
There is an opportunity for arbitrage via conversion txns iff at time t
expected [market price of 1 basecoin at time t+30000 / backing of a USD coin at time t+30000 - market price of a USDcoin at time t+30000| information available at time t] !=0
(note that t+30000 is approx 7 months after you lock in your bet at time t)
In January, you can commit x basecoin to the purchase of USDcoins at a future price equal to 1/backing of a USD coin in August. You cannot back out of this. The spot market price of a USDcoin has 7 months to adjust after you make your bet. The backing ratio has 7 months to adjust after you make your bet. If adjustment occurs within a 7 month time frame (quite a reasonable expectation in my opinion), the bet has negative expected value (you just lose 7 months interest on the invested capital and the txn fee). If you have some information advantage that is the basis for your bet, the bet reveals this information to the public, giving the market has 7 month to front-run you.
Alternatively: You may think that you exploit the realization of the bet by manipulating the mining process. I agree with you. I would handle this by using proof of stake mining. Then if you want to manipulate price reporting, you have to purchase a major ownership stake in the system first. If you have an ownership stake, you no longer want to manipulate price reporting.
If you still see a problem, outline it explicitly so I can address it. I laid out everything in mathematical detail.
You suggested there was a problem (likely a figment of your imagination) and then asked me to guess what you might be imagining. This is not productive. If you are so confident, say something specific.
More importantly, you may have missed 7 month delay part as described below:
7) [allowable on the blockchain conversion txns in block t]
1 basecoin -> 1/b_(t+30000) USDcoins
1 USDcoin -> b_(t+30000) basecoins
Basically you can convert between the currencies, but with a ~7 month delay. The conversion rate depends on the backing level 7 months from now. The txn inputs and outputs remain unspendable until 7 months from now when the coversion rate is revealed.
The only conversion txns allowed within the blockchain are described above. 1 basecoin -> 1/b_(t+30000) USDcoins
1 USDcoin -> b_(t+30000) basecoins
Basically you can convert between the currencies, but with a ~7 month delay. The conversion rate depends on the backing level 7 months from now. The txn inputs and outputs remain unspendable until 7 months from now when the coversion rate is revealed.
There is an opportunity for arbitrage via conversion txns iff at time t
expected [market price of 1 basecoin at time t+30000 / backing of a USD coin at time t+30000 - market price of a USDcoin at time t+30000| information available at time t] !=0
(note that t+30000 is approx 7 months after you lock in your bet at time t)
In January, you can commit x basecoin to the purchase of USDcoins at a future price equal to 1/backing of a USD coin in August. You cannot back out of this. The spot market price of a USDcoin has 7 months to adjust after you make your bet. The backing ratio has 7 months to adjust after you make your bet. If adjustment occurs within a 7 month time frame (quite a reasonable expectation in my opinion), the bet has negative expected value (you just lose 7 months interest on the invested capital and the txn fee). If you have some information advantage that is the basis for your bet, the bet reveals this information to the public, giving the market has 7 month to front-run you.
Alternatively: You may think that you exploit the realization of the bet by manipulating the mining process. I agree with you. I would handle this by using proof of stake mining. Then if you want to manipulate price reporting, you have to purchase a major ownership stake in the system first. If you have an ownership stake, you no longer want to manipulate price reporting.
If you still see a problem, outline it explicitly so I can address it. I laid out everything in mathematical detail.
You suggested there was a problem (likely a figment of your imagination) and then asked me to guess what you might be imagining. This is not productive. If you are so confident, say something specific.
So afterwards you say you'll add PoS mining to keep stake in check (consequently keeping supply/demand honest) and yet I also have no idea what I'm talking about...interesting.
Anyways...
Do you have any specific knowledge to share with us? I'm challenging you to come up with something here.
... I thought not.
First off, no, basecoin would be equity in the basecoin network just like bitcoin is equity in the bitcoin network. It has no intrinsic value or link to a real world value.
More importantly, you may have missed 7 month delay part as described below:
There is an opportunity for arbitrage via conversion txns iff at time t
expected [market price of 1 basecoin at time t+30000 / backing of a USD coin at time t+30000 - market price of a USDcoin at time t+30000| information available at time t] !=0
(note that t+30000 is approx 7 months after you lock in your bet at time t)
In January, you can commit x basecoin to the purchase of USDcoins at a future price equal to 1/backing of a USD coin in August. You cannot back out of this. The spot market price of a USDcoin has 7 months to adjust after you make your bet. The backing ratio has 7 months to adjust after you make your bet. If adjustment occurs within a 7 month time frame (quite a reasonable expectation in my opinion), the bet has negative expected value (you just lose 7 months interest on the invested capital and the txn fee). If you have some information advantage that is the basis for your bet, the bet reveals this information to the public, giving the market has 7 month to front-run you.
Alternatively: You may think that you exploit the realization of the bet by manipulating the mining process. I agree with you. I would handle this by using proof of stake mining. Then if you want to manipulate price reporting, you have to purchase a major ownership stake in the system first. If you have an ownership stake, you no longer want to manipulate price reporting.
If you still see a problem, outline it explicitly so I can address it. I laid out everything in mathematical detail.
You suggested there was a problem (likely a figment of your imagination) and then asked me to guess what you might be imagining. This is not productive. If you are so confident, say something specific.
More importantly, you may have missed 7 month delay part as described below:
7) [allowable on the blockchain conversion txns in block t]
1 basecoin -> 1/b_(t+30000) USDcoins
1 USDcoin -> b_(t+30000) basecoins
Basically you can convert between the currencies, but with a ~7 month delay. The conversion rate depends on the backing level 7 months from now. The txn inputs and outputs remain unspendable until 7 months from now when the coversion rate is revealed.
The only conversion txns allowed within the blockchain are described above. 1 basecoin -> 1/b_(t+30000) USDcoins
1 USDcoin -> b_(t+30000) basecoins
Basically you can convert between the currencies, but with a ~7 month delay. The conversion rate depends on the backing level 7 months from now. The txn inputs and outputs remain unspendable until 7 months from now when the coversion rate is revealed.
There is an opportunity for arbitrage via conversion txns iff at time t
expected [market price of 1 basecoin at time t+30000 / backing of a USD coin at time t+30000 - market price of a USDcoin at time t+30000| information available at time t] !=0
(note that t+30000 is approx 7 months after you lock in your bet at time t)
In January, you can commit x basecoin to the purchase of USDcoins at a future price equal to 1/backing of a USD coin in August. You cannot back out of this. The spot market price of a USDcoin has 7 months to adjust after you make your bet. The backing ratio has 7 months to adjust after you make your bet. If adjustment occurs within a 7 month time frame (quite a reasonable expectation in my opinion), the bet has negative expected value (you just lose 7 months interest on the invested capital and the txn fee). If you have some information advantage that is the basis for your bet, the bet reveals this information to the public, giving the market has 7 month to front-run you.
Alternatively: You may think that you exploit the realization of the bet by manipulating the mining process. I agree with you. I would handle this by using proof of stake mining. Then if you want to manipulate price reporting, you have to purchase a major ownership stake in the system first. If you have an ownership stake, you no longer want to manipulate price reporting.
If you still see a problem, outline it explicitly so I can address it. I laid out everything in mathematical detail.
You suggested there was a problem (likely a figment of your imagination) and then asked me to guess what you might be imagining. This is not productive. If you are so confident, say something specific.
So afterwards you say you'll add PoS mining to keep stake in check (consequently keeping supply/demand honest) and yet I also have no idea what I'm talking about...interesting.
Jump to: