Topic: There might be another virtual currency following BTC - page 2. (Read 7170 times)

I can't get there. Can you paste here the displayed text when I do that?

You got a strong point here. One of the reasons of the succes of the Wörgl Experiment is that the currency was losing its value (got taxed) if one didn't spend it.

OMG already they have dropped out of mainstream consciousness, quick, sell, sell, sell, before the price plum gets eaten! OMG OMG OMG

-MarkM- (Try Freenode #bitcoin-bots /msg nickelbot help nkl)

What are bitNickels ?

Don't forget World of Warcraft "gold". MUDflation inflationary enuff for ya?

-MarkM- (I already posted elsewhere that I suspect BitNickels might not prove as deflationary as Actual Original ("Hacker") Bitcoin.)

What do you think about freicoin? It would also have the 21 M (or other number) limit, but also demurrage. That would incentive people to either spend or invest rather than holding the currency.

Isn't this the reason we have cost-of-living wage increases, bonuses, etc?  Inflation also benefits mortgagees (and other debtors) by reducing their debt in relation to available currency.

Neither do the working classes.  They spend it.  It's a currency --

If one's exposure to the dollar is limited (i.e., hedged via DXY [or similar] puts), how does inflation hurt him?

If the working classes want to save or invest they buy stocks, bonds, mutual funds, or what have you (ideally based on advice from honest financial advisors or they merely leave it to the fund managers [essentially with hedging and diversification built-in to the funds themselves]).

and this ain't happening with Bitcoin?

Bitcoin changed the printing process of currency and that is great but by being limited it is GOLD. Some early adopters (we that are already in the system) will have large amounts and will be able to dictate the price others won't have at all. Now if a new currency i don't talk about Bitcoin but another one which would have an incentive for investing/spending for example inflation or taxation of wealth built in then i would adopt that currency . Bitcoin from what i understand has a constant monetary mass growth that is great until we reach the 21 mil limit then what will be the incentive to spend bitcoins other than changing in state accepted currency? If the hole purpose of bitcoin is a intermediary currency to facilitate transactions from one state backed currency to another or speculation than great it wont matter how valuable it will be. But i don't want an intermediary currency or digital gold i want global money printed by people and not by governments or banks or churches or other power pillar , that will facilitate trade and progress and not wealth.

Currency can't solve all the problems and it needs to be mixed with other measures but we are talking about currency here.

Some "gift cards" have fees assessed monthly to make them gradually go to zero.  The US and some states regulate this; in the US gift cards can't have periodic fees for the first year.

Then, of course, there's inflation.

Another enabler....... Seems you haven't put a lot of study into the monetary systems of the world and how one becomes uber wealthy. Their goal is to own nearly everything and make you a slave. At least they want to own everything that can be the facilitator of some type of transaction fee. Indenturing the world....

You're ok with this?

I don't care who will profit - rich or poor - from inflation currency.

In order to have big enough lending activity people should be discouraged from storing value in currency for long term.

If wealthy do not keep their wealth in currency - objective met. If they are running successful businesses - they have right to be wealthy.

The fail of Namecoin.

Inlfation is not the only way to discourage storing wealth in currency. Maybe he just wants freicoin.

"Now i would like a currency that looses some value over time to make wealth holders spend it on things that get profit and not sit on them. I Think currency shouldn't be a wealth storing medium."

Leaving aside the problematic rationale about what effect such a currency would have on wealth holders, I suspect pocket-change blockchain-based currencies might serve. For example much as I would like bitNicKeLs to forever grow in value, it seems likely that if they do in fact seem to be doing so umpteen imitators would appear, competing for the same userbase, resulting in small-change blockchain-based currencies in general tending to stay relatively small in value and quite possibly generally tend to decline in value (at least those of them that ever actually managed to aquire any value to potentially be able to lose).

Thoughts such as that are part of what leads me to think that having quite a few blockchain-based currencies in play should tend to help the original bitcoins to grow in value instead of tending to cause all blockchain based currencies, or the original bitcoins in particular, to decline in value.

Basically I am thinking that maybe if small-change / pocket-change blockchain based currencies are seen not to hold value very well, the strong value-retaining performance of 'the real thing' (meaning bitcoins, not pepsicolgatepalmolivecoin or colacoin or whatever used to be a real thing in adspeak once upon a time) might cause the 'real thing' (actual bitcoins) to gain cachet as notably a 'blue chip' blockchain-based currency.

The 'legend' built around the Freeciv Galactic Milieu blockchain-based currencies aims at furthering such perceptions by maintaining that the Hacker nation, originator of Bitcoin, that uses Bitcoins as national currency, is far more advanced than the Martians, whose Martian BotCoin is upheld by far more powerful technology than that possessed by the Brits and Canucks, and so on, with bitNicKeLs being so puny they are typically only worth about 1/20 of a UKB or CDN...

-MarkM-

Who says you can't do a, "stock split" with bitcoin?

I meant a new currency to compete with bitcoin, in which the algorithm for mining just so happened to be 10x faster on a 3dfx Voodoo card than the next leading mining chip.

Would love to see everyone rushing and digging though their old hardware, dusting off their old PCI / AGP based VooDoo cards. Hilarity would ensue...

Actually, the Voodoo 5 6000 is so rare, you could easily trade one in for a 6990 today. Nothing funny about that.

It does not matter. If suddenly a new miner software allowed the miners to do hashing at double speed, everybody would switch, difficultry would double and everything would remain the same.

If there is, it better be efficient on these ATI cards.

Wonder if making a new mine-able currency efficient on ATI cards would be a good thing or a bad thing. Would you want a HUGE jump in hashing power from all the Bitcoin miners switching over? Or maybe make it super efficient on the old 3DFx cards, just for fun 

They really are a type of currency, people don't think of them as such because they aren't freely convertable, you're pretty much stuck using them on airfare or some fairly limited catalog of products, but companies (like credit card companies) buy them from airlines to give out as rewards.

Amazon could start a new blockchain then give the coins out as rewards points.  You could then redeem them for money off on your purchase. They could also sell them to other web sites, you buy an airline ticket and get X amazonRewardPoints.  Since it is based on the blockchain, any partner could verify the number of points out there.  Also, they could accept points knowing they were free to re-distribute them and that Amazon was effectively fixing their value.  Pretty soon you'd have a large network of merchants both giving out and accepting points without having to trust each other not to create an arbitrary amount of points.

Not necessarily. Most merchants will be receiving currency and BTC and would apply Gresham's law. They would use the currency for operating expenses and save the BTC according to their own risk appetite and expectations. Liquidating BTC as needed.