I don't think I did I just can't see a solution to the problem. Every method can be easily exploited or too intrusive.
seems like it worked for stellar...
you can still give better alternatives. Maybe going for existing shares like clams?
Topic: Perfect POS Distribution (POSID) (Read 523 times)
I don't think I did I just can't see a solution to the problem. Every method can be easily exploited or too intrusive.
seems like it worked for stellar...
you can still give better alternatives. Maybe going for existing shares like clams?
The UNIQUE person is simply not existing in a decentralized and anonymous environment.
/thread, I'm afraid.
so you missed the main point, well done ;-)
I don't think I did I just can't see a solution to the problem. Every method can be easily exploited or too intrusive.
The UNIQUE person is simply not existing in a decentralized and anonymous environment.
/thread, I'm afraid.
so you missed the main point, well done ;-)
The UNIQUE person is simply not existing in a decentralized and anonymous environment.
/thread, I'm afraid.
Features can be programmed into any coin. The biggest problem is, that we don't reach the WORLD. We have to find a way to address everyone.
Heres my idea. I call it POSID (Proof of Stake Identity Distribution). I have it already for a while...
Please pm me at least on your release date, if you implemented this. That's fair ;-)
What is the good thing on bitcoin distribution?
Everyone can still get it "for free", if he mines it. Even now. But its getting less and less.
Early adapters have advantage. Thats good.
Of course they have a little too much advantage in this case, but in general its not bad, because they want to advertise the coin.
What is the bad thing?
Its power consuming.
Now only the people that have money can mine it. The early adapters had a little too much advantage.
How is the POS distribution?
Previous ICO attempts and giving for free attempts fail for only one reason:
They always make the ICO while the coin is still unknown. Later you have to pay more and more, to get it. Early adapters have way too much advantage.
How can we get the best out of all?
Ok. The perfect POS distribution would be, that every person on earth gets exactly 1 stake. But in my eyes thats a little unfair for the early adapters.
Why? Because they took the risk to jump in right away while others waited until its safe.
And: The coin can't get popular, because noone holds enough to say, "Oh, I want this rising! I have to advertise it!".
And people don't jump in because they think: "I can do that later anyway...". We still have to grab everyone on its greed.
So how can we get this more into the bitcoin advantage but not too much?
Simple every person can claim one and only one share for free. The shares stay free and (officially) untradeable.
All available coins (e.g. 36 000 000) are divided by several months (e.g. 36 (too much makes it too less advantage)).
These coins are then sent monthly to all claimed shareholders divided by there number. It can be programmed even in a smart contract.
So in the first month are only less shares claimed (e.g. 100). Then everone early adapter gets more coins (e.g. 10000) plus the later months.
In a later month are alredy more shares claimed (e.g. 10000). Then everone gets less coins (e.g. 100) plus the later months.
And at the end there are many shares claimed (e.g. 1000000). Then everone gets very less but still something (e.g. 1).
This provides a steady and fair growth. To push the price grow you could also put some progression in there, so that the monthly "dividend" is not always the same but getting lower similar to the bitcoin block reward getting less and less.
That sounds nice, but whats the problem?
Yeah, as you guessed, there is indeed a problem with this. It's the oldest problem of crypto.
The UNIQUE person is simply not existing in a decentralized and anonymous environment.
How can we handle this? Honestly I don't know. In my opinion we have to find some consensus, so that the share has to be granted not anonymous, like stellar was starting to do this already.
The following options I have. Tell me, if you have better:
- Facebook.
Fake accounts possible. But Facebook is trying to delete them already. If you say for example, the account has to be not older that 2014, facebook has deleted already most socks and you have potential of some billion users. Of course there are still socks, but a few could be ok. The biggest downside I see. If someone does not yet have a facebook account he can't join.
- Telephone numbers. Sending SMS for a share. Mobile phone numbers are unique. But everyone could have more (or many) phone cards. Still we will have socks. But they may be ok, as everyone can have a few mobile phones but too many are too expensive... So everyone has a reasonable amount of socks...
A problem is maybe the fakeable number, so that you have to provide a service, that sends a secret to a given number and then use this secret to grant a share.
- banking accounts
This is very far away from anonymity but the amount of banking accounts is for sure more restricted than SIM cards. The bad thing is, that in some countries people don't have the possibility to have even one banking account. Some kind of unfair.
- Government IDs
Far away from anonymity this would be still the best option of course. There were attempts like this already from some country-based coins like auroracoin. The biggest problem in my eyes is, that you have to proof every share in person. As long as there is no unfakeable personal GUID, this won't work.
I personally tend to the telephone numbers. What do you think?
Maybe someone wants to help developing it?
Here we come to another problem. A coin will not be developed, if developers don't hold a large amount of it. Even if they are early adapters, that will be problematic, because its not that much. Developing is expensive...
Maybe we can safe a few percent for them.
Heres my idea. I call it POSID (Proof of Stake Identity Distribution). I have it already for a while...
Please pm me at least on your release date, if you implemented this. That's fair ;-)
What is the good thing on bitcoin distribution?
Everyone can still get it "for free", if he mines it. Even now. But its getting less and less.
Early adapters have advantage. Thats good.
Of course they have a little too much advantage in this case, but in general its not bad, because they want to advertise the coin.
What is the bad thing?
Its power consuming.
Now only the people that have money can mine it. The early adapters had a little too much advantage.
How is the POS distribution?
Previous ICO attempts and giving for free attempts fail for only one reason:
They always make the ICO while the coin is still unknown. Later you have to pay more and more, to get it. Early adapters have way too much advantage.
How can we get the best out of all?
Ok. The perfect POS distribution would be, that every person on earth gets exactly 1 stake. But in my eyes thats a little unfair for the early adapters.
Why? Because they took the risk to jump in right away while others waited until its safe.
And: The coin can't get popular, because noone holds enough to say, "Oh, I want this rising! I have to advertise it!".
And people don't jump in because they think: "I can do that later anyway...". We still have to grab everyone on its greed.
So how can we get this more into the bitcoin advantage but not too much?
Simple every person can claim one and only one share for free. The shares stay free and (officially) untradeable.
All available coins (e.g. 36 000 000) are divided by several months (e.g. 36 (too much makes it too less advantage)).
These coins are then sent monthly to all claimed shareholders divided by there number. It can be programmed even in a smart contract.
So in the first month are only less shares claimed (e.g. 100). Then everone early adapter gets more coins (e.g. 10000) plus the later months.
In a later month are alredy more shares claimed (e.g. 10000). Then everone gets less coins (e.g. 100) plus the later months.
And at the end there are many shares claimed (e.g. 1000000). Then everone gets very less but still something (e.g. 1).
This provides a steady and fair growth. To push the price grow you could also put some progression in there, so that the monthly "dividend" is not always the same but getting lower similar to the bitcoin block reward getting less and less.
That sounds nice, but whats the problem?
Yeah, as you guessed, there is indeed a problem with this. It's the oldest problem of crypto.
The UNIQUE person is simply not existing in a decentralized and anonymous environment.
How can we handle this? Honestly I don't know. In my opinion we have to find some consensus, so that the share has to be granted not anonymous, like stellar was starting to do this already.
The following options I have. Tell me, if you have better:
- Facebook.
Fake accounts possible. But Facebook is trying to delete them already. If you say for example, the account has to be not older that 2014, facebook has deleted already most socks and you have potential of some billion users. Of course there are still socks, but a few could be ok. The biggest downside I see. If someone does not yet have a facebook account he can't join.
- Telephone numbers. Sending SMS for a share. Mobile phone numbers are unique. But everyone could have more (or many) phone cards. Still we will have socks. But they may be ok, as everyone can have a few mobile phones but too many are too expensive... So everyone has a reasonable amount of socks...
A problem is maybe the fakeable number, so that you have to provide a service, that sends a secret to a given number and then use this secret to grant a share.
- banking accounts
This is very far away from anonymity but the amount of banking accounts is for sure more restricted than SIM cards. The bad thing is, that in some countries people don't have the possibility to have even one banking account. Some kind of unfair.
- Government IDs
Far away from anonymity this would be still the best option of course. There were attempts like this already from some country-based coins like auroracoin. The biggest problem in my eyes is, that you have to proof every share in person. As long as there is no unfakeable personal GUID, this won't work.
I personally tend to the telephone numbers. What do you think?
Maybe someone wants to help developing it?
Here we come to another problem. A coin will not be developed, if developers don't hold a large amount of it. Even if they are early adapters, that will be problematic, because its not that much. Developing is expensive...
Maybe we can safe a few percent for them.
Jump to: