Regardless if we have a real problem or not, the possible problem can't be much of an issue right now, right?
A few days ago I bought 1000 Namecoins for about 4.6 Bitcoins, i.e. 30 USD or something. For this amount I can register thousands of domains (about 5000 if I remember correctly). So, stopping squatters clearly doesn't work, right? Perhaps we should INCREASE the destruction of namecoins, if squatters are the real issue here?
Topic: My appeal to vinced and namecoin developers [DESIGN PROPOSALS] - page 2. (Read 7158 times)
January 31, 2012, 10:17:14 AM
I don't see real reason to limit coins in existence (especially when system is systematically destroying them).
This is also a point! 
I see, still we're talking about almost 21.000.000.000.000.000 domain updates in current system.
However I agree that never ending inflation may work better than hardcoded 21mil limit. Namecoin isn't a currency and I don't see real reason to limit coins in existence (especially when system is systematically destroying them).
However I agree that never ending inflation may work better than hardcoded 21mil limit. Namecoin isn't a currency and I don't see real reason to limit coins in existence (especially when system is systematically destroying them).
afaik there's some algorithm which calculates price for domain from last x blocks. So yes, those coins are destroyed, but when namecoin gets some popularity and namecoins will be more expensive, then domain will cost maybe eve 1 satoshi, which means we can still have bazilion of domains.
I am programmist (not in c++ unfortunately), and one of programmist rule says: The future comes much quicker than expected.So if the future will bring a collapse, im worried. Worried because namecoin may become a basis of I2P naming structure.
afaik there's some algorithm which calculates price for domain from last x blocks. So yes, those coins are destroyed, but when namecoin gets some popularity and namecoins will be more expensive, then domain will cost maybe eve 1 satoshi, which means we can still have bazilion of domains.
Actually this is not from empty place. There is some logic in that.
Miner has a 1Ghash/s mining power.
With a difficulty 518525.94130231 he will get 1.94 NMC per day.
Day left, he mined 1.94 NMC and bought 194 domains.
If system pass that 1.94 NMC as reward for block solving, miners' total daily revenue will be increased by 1.94*(his_power/network_power).
Actually this is the "money from nothing". And devs still didnt find any suitable method to resolve this except to destroy these coins.
So my proposal is: may be is it possible to hold domain associated coins util it will be expired.
Miner has a 1Ghash/s mining power.
With a difficulty 518525.94130231 he will get 1.94 NMC per day.
Day left, he mined 1.94 NMC and bought 194 domains.
If system pass that 1.94 NMC as reward for block solving, miners' total daily revenue will be increased by 1.94*(his_power/network_power).
Actually this is the "money from nothing". And devs still didnt find any suitable method to resolve this except to destroy these coins.
So my proposal is: may be is it possible to hold domain associated coins util it will be expired.
Wow...
If that's the case, frankly, it's awful. How come people didn't think that they would run out of coins when they implemented this?
It seems like one of those "temporary fixes to be improved later", something that should not be present on important protocols...
If that's the case, frankly, it's awful. How come people didn't think that they would run out of coins when they implemented this?
It seems like one of those "temporary fixes to be improved later", something that should not be present on important protocols...
namecoin has identical emission behavior to bitcoin. 21M of max "coins" (each coin is 1E8 (if not mistake) integer). So the total possible number of namecoins is the same as bitcoins = 21E6 * 1E8 = 21E14. It is deflated in value by default.
Additionally, namecoin has special transactions which contain key=value pair (i.e. domain => ip). When first registering such key (domain), the fee for registering is actually destroyed (to fight squaters). So every domain registered decreases total possible number of NMC currently by 0.01 (1E6 = 1 million integers). 81k namecoins (81E12 integers) are already destroyed by this way.
So namecoin is doomed for death with this behavior someday.
Additionally, namecoin has special transactions which contain key=value pair (i.e. domain => ip). When first registering such key (domain), the fee for registering is actually destroyed (to fight squaters). So every domain registered decreases total possible number of NMC currently by 0.01 (1E6 = 1 million integers). 81k namecoins (81E12 integers) are already destroyed by this way.
So namecoin is doomed for death with this behavior someday.
If I understood correctly, namecoin inflation never stops. It's a constant, linear growth. So, there will always be new coins.
The greatest problem I see is that this way it seems the domain growth rate is also linear. If one day it gets popular and goes viral, exponential domain growth will not be possible. Namecoin domains will become too expensive, people will give up, and that will slow down adoption to a linear growth as well, what would be a pity.
On the other hand, making domain growth exponential might be too much.
I wonder how to match domain growth with the demand for new domain names...
PS: I don't understand much about namecoin, so I might be saying bullshit.
The greatest problem I see is that this way it seems the domain growth rate is also linear. If one day it gets popular and goes viral, exponential domain growth will not be possible. Namecoin domains will become too expensive, people will give up, and that will slow down adoption to a linear growth as well, what would be a pity.
On the other hand, making domain growth exponential might be too much.
I wonder how to match domain growth with the demand for new domain names...
PS: I don't understand much about namecoin, so I might be saying bullshit.
==cut out===
Purpose of this thread to find a way to build censorship resistant authoritative key=value storage (Distributed DNS) based on Satoshi ideas.
Please scroll down for design improvement proposals to namecoin.
Also here http://dot-bit.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=58&start=40
And russian discussion is here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=61486.80
Current namecoin design has several errors which are:
0. Coins are destroyed Proof
1. NetworkFee descreasing for 50 to zero and will be zero in ~80000 block Proof and has no feedback with network activity like difficulty has.
2. Namecoin was designed for free domains and this is its future Proof
3. Developers have to do system intrusion from time to time to avoid collapse or spam hell Proof Proof
Purpose of this thread to find a way to build censorship resistant authoritative key=value storage (Distributed DNS) based on Satoshi ideas.
Please scroll down for design improvement proposals to namecoin.
Also here http://dot-bit.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=58&start=40
And russian discussion is here: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=61486.80
Current namecoin design has several errors which are:
0. Coins are destroyed Proof
1. NetworkFee descreasing for 50 to zero and will be zero in ~80000 block Proof and has no feedback with network activity like difficulty has.
2. Namecoin was designed for free domains and this is its future Proof
3. Developers have to do system intrusion from time to time to avoid collapse or spam hell Proof Proof
Jump to: