Topic: new token idea (Read 364 times)

Thanks for reading the paper before replying.

Yes, considering how many currencies there are, there are certainly some that could do that. That's what I meant, I'm not deep enough into crypto to keep up with all the currencies out there and what they're doing.
I have heard of Dusk, but in my opinion they are trying to do too much at the same time.

My intention is to create a digital currency, no smart contracts, nothing like that. Just a digital currency that is as usable as any fiat currency.
I think it's important to create a currency that is inflation stable, but at the same time not capped. So I think time tokenization is the most stable option.



I don't know yet if there is a use for the currency, I think there is, but we will see. That is the reason I posted it here, besides discussing the concept.

The use case of the concept is not original at all. I am not trying to reinvent the wheel, I am just trying to adapt it and build something new on top of it.

If it fails, it fails. I am not looking for investors or people to trust me with their money. This concept is far from being realized. My project, my risk. What I want is feedback.
That is why I have tried to develop a distribution system that sends tokens to wallets. You can get tokens without giving me your money. This makes it easy to test and participate without any risk.

For me I think it isn't, so sorry, but I understand because the @OP said that he is a newbie in the crypto world. Maybe this project can still be accepted only for him to gain an experience since some people like you still like it. OP already explained how his project works. It does provide a solution in the payment field. Not all cryptos created are useful but many of them are just a scam.

There are some which use case are not original. These projects still has their own whitepapers, but of course not all written on it are accurate so we should not only depend on it when looking for a coin to invest but we should also check out other things.

Problem it's solving you can find right in the last "Conclusion" part of the pdf draft that OP provided.

However my question to op is that aren't there already projects that are building to solve these problems? Why wouldn't you join your forces and seek to work with bigger groups that have manpower behind them, than inventing something from a scratch? Dusk Network for example is one of the teams that are building regulatory friendly solution.

The token idea is okay, but what you need to know is that every token created has to solve a problem or have a product, because cryptocurrency market has to deal with products and services, and which product or service the coin going to give and everything has to be stated in whitepepper which can attract crypto communities more.

Have you read the white paper?

The goal is to make the system verifiable and auditable, yes. The public ledger system is just one aspect of that. And it leaves open the possibility of decentralizing certain aspects of the system later to create offline transactions (just a theory for now).

Random was not the best word to describe it, sorry. The distribution process is based on seeds. The name of the token (the second of the Unix time it belongs to) is one seed, the other seed is the number of wallets in the system. So it's not a UBI system, because the system doesn't try to make sure to send tokens to everyone. It tries to make the distribution process verifiable.

Since the token generation process is stable regardless of how many wallets there are, the bot problem should not be as worrisome. But that's why there is a flat fee for each transaction.
If every bot creates a thousand wallets, they reduce the chance of getting a token at all, and also need at least two tokens because of the flat fee of one.

The problem I am trying to solve is the unstable processing time of decentralized coins and the processing fee without requiring proof of work or proof of stake, while at the same time being transparent and having a token distribution process without arbitrary requirements.

Hello mate congratulations for your mind setup but i have one request to you if you thinking developing new coin or token for marketplace than your need to know as well deeply because crypto is not playing items it’s your future and please avoid thinking development about launching new token without deep knowledge before involving crypto need to study properly & need to research continuously. I,m just remembering you take care & take good decision to your side thanks.

If your goal is to make the system able to be audited and verified, you don't have to specifically make a centralized and public ledger system. Second, you are trying to randomly send the coins to existing wallets. Well, good luck dealing with bots. Besides, the distribution process is really obscure, are you trying to make a kind of UBI-scheme system?

The last thing is, what is your actual use case and the problems you trying to solve? I don't see any of this could garner an attention due to you are building something that has no foundational reasoning.

Are you saying that the idea of how token generation is done, as I outlined it in the white paper, isn't good enough?

Your idea is not good enough, because when we can use the coin or I can just say the main use of the coin? There would be further implementation in the production of coins, that people already used and further there will be some upgradation to the coin's features.

The purpose of the coin is to create a digital currency that is inflationary and can process transactions faster. So that using it as a currency is more convenient and more incentivized. That's the main idea.
I never said that there won't be a liquidity pool or that there can't be a liquidity pool. But the purpose of the post was a few steps back. The concept behind it, not how to bootstrap it.
Also, my idea of doing a liquidity pool would be a bit different. Since the token generation is not tied to a genesis wallet but based on seeds, users could get the tokens and you could do a buyback of them.
That way you could bootstrap the currency without people having to buy it in the beginning, and the risk is on me and maybe some other investors. But right now there's not even a platform ready, because it's supposed to be a native coin.

It is difficult for me to understand your concept, since it does not reveal the true purpose of creating a coin. Why should this coin have value if no one would be interested in creating a liquidity pool? I think that in this case we will get another garbage coin, the value of which will be zero.

The first draft of the white paper.

Not sure if it is allowed to link it like that (is it advertisement?), in case it's not, I will publish it in a different way.

https://asset.centraltoken.io/asset/0.0.1/centraltoken_draft1.pdf

Thanks again for the feedback.

I realize that creating a project like this is a huge undertaking, and that creating something is usually only 30% of the work. The paperwork and marketing is a whole other beast.
I have been a developer for over a decade and have done projects before (not crypto related). My motivation behind this is, I have been in crypto since BTC was 17$ and I think there are some aspects I would like to try to iterate on.

However, the reason I posted it here is to see the initial reaction to the concept to gauge if it is worth pursuing.

As I mentioned, I will be releasing a drafted white paper soon, and the reference implementation should be done today or tomorrow. Which I will then use to test if my assumptions work.
It's meant to be its own platform, not ERC20 or something.

Op Your idea is fantastic creating a centralised token, a public ledger, and random distributions might be used to create novel dynamics. I think Flat transaction costs and constant inflation are intriguing additions to the ecology. But its crucial to properly take into account the financial ramifications and probable difficulties in implementation and adoption beacuse already million on token are listed on coinmarketcap. Your proposal might be improved by talking to crypto professionals. Good luck with the creation of your token but make it unique with unique product

Yes, making it may be easy, but marketing it, of course, requires special strategies and expertise.f it's only for the sake of looking for a momentary profit, it seems that many do it, and usually it won't be marketable, aka a scam.Is it true what has been said above, that there have been many examples that can be seen where many are not accepted in the market, and of course, what would you be looking for?You will only spend energy, thoughts, and maybe funds that, in the end, cannot get any results at all.I think what the colleagues above said can be taken into consideration before it is true that you will do it.​

Thanks for the feedback so far.

I am working on a white paper to better illustrate this.

Please don't we already have a sea of shitcoins already we don't need more if you do not have a platform to back up your token or it is something revolutionary in a chain and it's just a pump-and-dump token I'm sure with over 10k coins listed and thousand more deads it has already been implemented, investors could have accepted it if it brings something new and unique so many coins and tokens are just trend coins or duplicate of existing coins.

If you want to proceed it's up to you but things are different now people want to see the use case especially if your token will do a crowdfunding, so many developers are flooding the market with new tokens because of the crowdfunding, and once they got the money they dump their shares then leave, leaving investors losing their money.

Anyone can create a token from scratch using a smart contract deplorer but the question is that what will be the use case of your tokens? Will it have a great significance towards the future of crypto tokens you will make? It is better to be said and done but actually creating a project is really that hard. There are lots of tokens in the market that are useless, so think it twice before implementing one.

Overall, your concept presents some unique ideas. but it is crucial to thoroughly analyze and address potential challenges before proceeding. Conducting market research and consulting with experts in the crypto space help to refine your concept. Also, be prepared to adapt your concept based on feedback from the community as you move forward with development.

Centralization and a public ledger seem at odds in the context of crypto. The absence of a governing body, or "centralization," is crypto's key selling point. Therefore, there may be less demand for a centralized token. Still, the answer is conditional on the nature of centralization and the degree of control exercised.

Distributing tokens by sending them at random to users' existing wallets? Interesting, however fairness issues may arise if tokens are distributed at random, especially if those with larger wallets wind up with a disproportionate share. Perhaps an algorithmic method would work better.

Again, flat transaction fees can have both positive and negative effects. While they may make computations easier, they may also put off customers who rely on little purchases to advance their game.

Last but not least, persistent inflation can discourage long-term investment in the coin by causing its value to gradually decrease. Keep in mind that a cryptocurrency's (or any currency's) stability is essential to its widespread use.