Topic: My perfect crypto money! (Read 221 times)

Yes, a lot of altcoins use exactly the same source code as Bitcoin and there are only small, minor changes here and there. There are some exceptions like Ethereum written entirely from scratch, but most of the coins are based on some version of Bitcoin Core.

I guess he wasn't complaining, just pointing out that the only important thing is scarcity, so there is no point in trying to change 21 million coins limit. Also, there are some interesting examples how to increase scarcity without creating bigger values than 64-bit: https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/representing-fractional-satoshis-in-difficulty-like-format-5330102. I think that proposal is quite interesting, but I prefer using decimal prefixes instead of binary, for example "03" for millisatoshis.

I guess for some people it wasn't obvious if total supply will be limited. There are successful coins with tail emission like Dogecoin or Monero.

That's quite similar to one of my test sidechains, where test coins are created by sending to "cpu1qtapr00t" vanity address and burned by spending them on mainchain. But in my test network, coins are naturally distinct (there are mainnet coins and testnet coins), here I can see two coins for no reason.

Technically, there is something called range proofs. They are quite heavy, but it is possible to prove that some number is in some range without revealing it. As far as I know, coins like Monero or Grin use that kind of things. More than that: Grin use Pedersen Commitments, so each block is in fact one huge transaction with a lot of inputs and outputs, joined at mempool level by miners. Maybe something like that will be implemented in Litecoin in the future when they will activate MimbleWimble protocol.

If you use typical integers in typical programming languages, all numbers are rounded down, so one divided by two is zero (the same for 9/10). But I think such values could be simply rejected on mempool level.

I think creating and burning makes sense if there are some sidechains, but on mainchain it is not needed. Of course you can try it, the worst that could happen is just that the coin will be more complex, as far as I know that shouldn't affect security if done correctly.

So do you want to mine single transactions instead of mining the whole blocks? (whatever "mining" means in context of no difficulty)

Because in Ripple coin distribution was unfair. No difficulty means that coins have to be distributed somehow, the chain have to be protected from reorganizations and double-spending somehow. Skipping difficulty is one thing, but it should be replaced by something, because in other case it is not better than some centralized database in many banks. From difficulty comes security, you cannot produce Bitcoins just like that because of huge difficulty. If some coin has no difficulty, it has to be protected somehow and there is no information about that protections.

Bitcoin is backed by the heaviest chain of sha256d Proof of Work in the world.

That's true, but you have to use energy to make them. If there is no difficulty, then the energy involved in coin creation is minimal, so the value of the coin is also minimal, because the creator can produce a lot of coins just like banks. Even if some coin has limited supply, then still, initial coin creation usually belongs entirely to the coin creator, so it is unfair. Bitcoin would be worth much less than today if everyone would have to buy all coins from Satoshi.

Because most coins with no difficulty are premined or there are ICO's splitting coin supply between early adopters. In Bitcoin there are no such things, because coins are distributed based on difficulty, so they are based on using energy needed to create them. If there is no difficulty, that problem of initial coin distribution have to be solved somehow and I don't see any such coin doing it in a fair and honest way.

You mean passwords invented by humans? They have low entropy, that's why public keys are better, because they are more random. Using public keys alone can provide enough security, but problems mentioned above are not related to that. You can use the same elliptic curve as Bitcoin, the problems above still hold. What if someone will create two conflicting transactions? In your coin Alice could send some coins to Bob, then restore some backup on another machine and send the same coins to Charlie. How your coin is protected from that if there is no difficulty? Who decides which transaction comes first? More than that: if there are two mining nodes, who decides which block is correct if there is no difficulty? Also, if there is some third node and it has completely different chain, who decides which chain is valid? In Bitcoin, all of those things are solved by difficulty, here you need some other solution for such problems.

Overall most things you said are like: "What if the wallets have no passwords? Without passwords your money could be stolen by a hacker! Bad unsafe coin!"
...Come on.

I understand if you are totally in love with the bitcoin system - but not everyone believe that btc would be good to be the dollar.
It's not that I don't agree with u that there are many points that need to set up right, but that should be clear anyway.

Because your coin is very similar to that, just more complex.

It doesn't matter. In Bitcoin you can also show all amounts in satoshis and have no decimal places. You can place your decimal separator everywhere, it doesn't change anything, the only thing that matters is how small is the smallest unit and how many units are in the system.

This can potentially create unlimited inflation, because you can send coins to yourself (and also mine it yourself). If you have one coin and send it million times to yourself, how many coins are created? One million? Only single coin? Half million coins? Also, there is no point in creating more than one coin, unless they should be non-exchangeable (for example like in Truthcoin where you have cash coins, covered 1:1 with Bitcoin and voting coins, completely disconnected from Bitcoin).

Aha. So inflation will drain any value from that coin.

Setting fees in some artificial way is not enough to prevent free market from rebalancing that. You can have no fees, and then people will introduce them by creating additional outputs. You can have too high fees, and then people will receive some of their coins back as transaction output or abandon the chain. Setting some rules on mempool level is possible, but forcing them on consensus level is not, because there will always be some workarounds to achieve any fees that users want.

What if you have the smallest unit? Is it unspendable? Or is it 100% burned? Splitting amounts in half does not change anything that much, you could divide coin supply by two and 100% fees could be taken by the miners, it will be no different from that system, just more compressed and less obscure than in your proposal.

So there is no regulation, just half of the coin supply is active, but that changes nothing in practice. You can also say that BTC has 42 million coins, but half of them are inactive, as you can see, nothing changed in that case.

So it is less fungible and less resistant to KYC/AML regulations, because exchanges can trivially enforce using non-encrypted addresses and transactions, as it is in many other coins. Take ZCash for example: if some addresses are known and others are hidden, it is still possible to know many things about participants by analyzing everything what is public. Also look at Monero, which is delisted from some exchanges.

So this coin is worthless, because there is no incentive, no protection from chain reorganizations, or maybe it is centralized like in Proof of Stake (especially if all coins are created at the start, because they have to be somehow created: if there is no difficulty, then I assume that everything is just premined, like for example in the Ripple).

There is no reason to hold such coins if they are backed by nothing. Bitcoins are backed at least by computing power, but in your coin there is no difficulty, so coins are created by the coin founder just like that and distributed between participants. So, unfair coin distribution and lack of protection from double-spending or chain reorganizations.

Your idea is nice. But I don't understand some things: is your ideal coin work on Proof-of-work or Proof-of-Stake? As if it is on PoW it will not be eco-friendly, it requires a lot of energy. Also I don't understand why you are against limited supply? Actually this hard cap supports the price and when this coin reaches its max, it becomes a deflationary asset, so holders get profit from it as well.

Don't bet too much on what u think! ^^

I just can't imagine ripple become the money we all pay daily things with tbh. But who knows. Anyway - would be nice to not talk just about other coins/concepts here 

Ripple is a great project and I think it is the future of finance. I also bought NEAR, it's the future of the internet and infinitely scalable with horizontal sharding.

Well, kind words are very rare here - thanks!

If it would be so easy like you said...but we will see.

You have a great concept in designing a new crypto, I highly recommend you set up a project with a concept like this, along with your team. it will definitely be much in demand and supported because it's an interesting concept.

Why you come exactly with ripple? Why is btc better than eth? Why is ripple better than btc?
Tbh im not into ripple so big so maybe you might think my idea is quite similar with ripple or what do you mean?

But I can say one thing what I think - you will never buy your cigarettes in a store in your of your street with ripple. (Imo)

Also as far as I understand is ripple nothing else than a payment processor company in the end.
My perfect coin would be free from any company (like bitcoin).

Why is your coin better than Ripple?

But it's not the complexity of the protection that takes the miners so long/so much energy - it's the solving of unnessecary task to mine "new" BTC.
That's what I mean with simulated value and a huge waste of energy.







pls spam somewhere else.

As we know that ICP is a new token, but a big team of skilled professionals. The project’s goal is to tackle particular and rather global Internet challenges. If the makers can work upon the target set by them, the value of ICP is bound to skyrocket. ICP is a sound investment. It is an extremely ambitious project with excellent computer scientists and a million-dollar investment from Marc Anderssen (creator of Netscape) and other major investors.
Why 2021 is the best time to invest in Internet Computer (ICP)?

People (not miners) fell in love with BTC precisely because the complexity of its mining naturally and evidently protected people's assets (including from the risks of hostile actions of power centers) transferred to this bitcoin blockchain. And people agreed to pay for such a service to miners.
The market determines this price.
Then there are disputes and forecasts about how much this market is subject to manipulation by new centers of power and how much it is critical.

No I'm not.


I know that this was the main reason why BTC was getting it's value. On the other hand it's just a simulated value, in fact it's one of the biggest contra arguments from science these days cause it's based on a huge energy waste. Sure it's an "easy" way to gave a coin value, but I believe for a "global money" a system where miners ONLY work on the transactions (well they need a new name then  ) would be more accepted by the most, not only cause the energy/costs for a transaction would be cheaper - it feels more efficient (imagine your Amazon driver would first drive around your house 10 times before put the package in front of your door - it just feels stupid and unnessecary).

So yes your totally right, the question would be how this money would get it's value - but in the end every value is made by the humans - BTC was not getting so big just cause of the mining - it's cause more and more people like it and wanted it.

Hi!

Are you a programmer?


Comments on the idea.
Why is this good?  "there is no rising difficulty or something else they need to solve (no more wasted energy) - an eco friendly mining system."

Rising difficulty gives hope that what is mined today will cost more tomorrow

Hey all.

Since years I had a concept for a coin that would fit all needs (imo) and want to know some opinions on it.
I see so many stupid and nonsens in the world of cryptos and i asked myself, why not take your concept and start to build it up and share it, maybe it opens some doors to realize it.

So i want share my coin, thats not created yet! So feel free to contibute with ideas!

BlueCredit - System

The ECredit - System is divided in two related coins (good to compare with ETH and Gas).

1. BlueCredits (or HardCredits)
There is a total supply of x BC, no decimal places.
Generating GreenCredits, every x transactions the same amount (1BC generates 1 GC every x transactions).

2. GreenCredits (or SoftCredits)
No max. supply. No decimal places. Used as daily fast money and are required to send BlueCredits.


So BlueCredits generating GreenCredits like ETH gas. But in this case the "gas" is the actual money we use and BlueCredits are more an investment system that generates new money.

The min transaction fee is determinated on x% of any amount. 50% of the transaction fees goes to the miners that solve the transactions, the other 50% get burned! This is how the coin regulates itself.

Also the sender can decide how "safe" each transaction has to be - the encryption can be raised unlimited (what means that a higher encryption need more time/work for the miner to do the transaction). This would make it stay safe also when the time of quantum computing is arrived.

Miners are only using their power to solve transactions - there is no rising difficulty or something else they need to solve (no more wasted energy) - an eco friendly mining system. Every miner who solve a transaction get the 50% fees from it.


In this system investors could have a lot of interest in BlueCredits to hold cause they generating new supply. On the other hand the GreeCredit would be the payment methode for any time and any "money" transaction. It would regulate it self with the burning effect and could handle a stable finance system.

Feel free do destroy my idea!