Topic: Would you like to become a co-owner of a world bank? (Read 1292 times)
Sure, I would love to...I didn't concur because it sounded like money plus, but because if it is called a decentralized system, I believe it is an answer to remote work. I love remote work from any location and speaking about to co-own; I would champion the cause of a decentralized system because my interest shows I do believe it will one day be world unitarian in policy for commerce and trade.
Of course this is a good offer because the co-owner of a crypto bank is a promising thing, especially if the crypto we lead can skyrocket like Solana, Polygon or others, millions of dollars a year salary is certainly easy for us to get.
Smart idea Victor. That's why I'm interested. Wish you could resolve the issue I spoke about concerning zero devaluation.
By the way, if you are a programmer, I could work with you. I'm particularly interested in guidance. I'm deep into this & have had past offers from couple of people to work with them .. unfortunately I didn't accept them due to certain reasons. It's becoming more urgent to develop something tough & useful before it's too late
Unfortunately, I'm not a programmer, I'm looking for programmers who can bring this complex project to life. If you understand how to implement this idea, you are welcome, I accept any help in cooperation. I was offered a team of programmers to implement this project, but the first question they were interested in was not how it works and what to do it for, but what my budget is. I understand that any work must be paid for and if someone paid me for my development, which I have been doing for many years, I would be able to pay the cost of the programmers' work. I also offered programmers joint participation in the development of the project, as a result of which, after its implementation, they would earn much more than their costs, but everyone is interested in income here and now.By the way, if you are a programmer, I could work with you. I'm particularly interested in guidance. I'm deep into this & have had past offers from couple of people to work with them .. unfortunately I didn't accept them due to certain reasons. It's becoming more urgent to develop something tough & useful before it's too late
Ofcourse, lack of funding is always part of the problem, but I'm not interesting in that. Idea & gifted programmers should be ready first then funding will come, especially if your funder is convinced.
In regards to the funding, I could advise you to raise it from the Market. "He" is about to move price up. It's hard to convince this faithless world that price can actually be moved by him. Just believe!
If I had a sponsor, the project would already be working and you wouldn't have to persuade everyone to follow you to move the price, the project would do it for you. Your efforts to convince everyone of the correctness of your idea are in vain, since not everyone believes in God, most believe in the golden calf, and not in the mission.
Smart idea Victor. That's why I'm interested. Wish you could resolve the issue I spoke about concerning zero devaluation.
By the way, if you are a programmer, I could work with you. I'm particularly interested in guidance. I'm deep into this & have had past offers from couple of people to work with them .. unfortunately I didn't accept them due to certain reasons. It's becoming more urgent to develop something tough & useful before it's too late
Unfortunately, I'm not a programmer, I'm looking for programmers who can bring this complex project to life. If you understand how to implement this idea, you are welcome, I accept any help in cooperation. I was offered a team of programmers to implement this project, but the first question they were interested in was not how it works and what to do it for, but what my budget is. I understand that any work must be paid for and if someone paid me for my development, which I have been doing for many years, I would be able to pay the cost of the programmers' work. I also offered programmers joint participation in the development of the project, as a result of which, after its implementation, they would earn much more than their costs, but everyone is interested in income here and now.By the way, if you are a programmer, I could work with you. I'm particularly interested in guidance. I'm deep into this & have had past offers from couple of people to work with them .. unfortunately I didn't accept them due to certain reasons. It's becoming more urgent to develop something tough & useful before it's too late
Ofcourse, lack of funding is always part of the problem, but I'm not interesting in that. Idea & gifted programmers should be ready first then funding will come, especially if your funder is convinced.
In regards to the funding, I could advise you to raise it from the Market. "He" is about to move price up. It's hard to convince this faithless world that price can actually be moved by him. Just believe!
Smart idea Victor. That's why I'm interested. Wish you could resolve the issue I spoke about concerning zero devaluation.
By the way, if you are a programmer, I could work with you. I'm particularly interested in guidance. I'm deep into this & have had past offers from couple of people to work with them .. unfortunately I didn't accept them due to certain reasons. It's becoming more urgent to develop something tough & useful before it's too late
Unfortunately, I'm not a programmer, I'm looking for programmers who can bring this complex project to life. If you understand how to implement this idea, you are welcome, I accept any help in cooperation. I was offered a team of programmers to implement this project, but the first question they were interested in was not how it works and what to do it for, but what my budget is. I understand that any work must be paid for and if someone paid me for my development, which I have been doing for many years, I would be able to pay the cost of the programmers' work. I also offered programmers joint participation in the development of the project, as a result of which, after its implementation, they would earn much more than their costs, but everyone is interested in income here and now. By the way, if you are a programmer, I could work with you. I'm particularly interested in guidance. I'm deep into this & have had past offers from couple of people to work with them .. unfortunately I didn't accept them due to certain reasons. It's becoming more urgent to develop something tough & useful before it's too late
Of course, a good offer if it can become a co -owner of Cryptocurrencies decentralization of the bank, to make a new project requires large capital, so the easy thing is to join the top projects such as BNB, Solana or others.
Smart idea Victor. That's why I'm interested. Wish you could resolve the issue I spoke about concerning zero devaluation.
By the way, if you are a programmer, I could work with you. I'm particularly interested in guidance. I'm deep into this & have had past offers from couple of people to work with them .. unfortunately I didn't accept them due to certain reasons. It's becoming more urgent to develop something tough & useful before it's too late
By the way, if you are a programmer, I could work with you. I'm particularly interested in guidance. I'm deep into this & have had past offers from couple of people to work with them .. unfortunately I didn't accept them due to certain reasons. It's becoming more urgent to develop something tough & useful before it's too late
Something we have gone in the direction of a decentralized network, although your previous question was
Quote
What is the main problem you want to solve with this? What makes you think more problems won't be created trying to solve the problem.
Do you have examples of assets that do not or will not lose value?
Your idea is very interesting though/quote]
I'm just trying to convey to everyone the solution to this problem with this project.
39. Now the main investment, transforming into a decentralized financial liquid asset of bond tokens, has a growth trend and under no circumstances can be frozen, reset to zero, devalued, it becomes possible to directly place any Fiat in a decentralized crypto economy through the crypto currency Ethereum. Investing and lending secured by token-bonds will become very profitable and safe. Bond tokens produced by a real financial asset replacing the turnover of ETH in deposit becomes a reliable settlement coin between counterparties.
Take a look at the chart confirming the limited issue of the bank's gold shares, there cannot be more than 10 million of them.
Do you have examples of assets that do not or will not lose value?
Your idea is very interesting though/quote]
I'm just trying to convey to everyone the solution to this problem with this project.
39. Now the main investment, transforming into a decentralized financial liquid asset of bond tokens, has a growth trend and under no circumstances can be frozen, reset to zero, devalued, it becomes possible to directly place any Fiat in a decentralized crypto economy through the crypto currency Ethereum. Investing and lending secured by token-bonds will become very profitable and safe. Bond tokens produced by a real financial asset replacing the turnover of ETH in deposit becomes a reliable settlement coin between counterparties.
Take a look at the chart confirming the limited issue of the bank's gold shares, there cannot be more than 10 million of them.
What is the main problem you want to solve with this? What makes you think more problems won't be created trying to solve the problem.
Do you have examples of assets that do not or will not lose value?
Your idea is very interesting though
Do you have examples of assets that do not or will not lose value?
Your idea is very interesting though
Good question.
In my opinion, the main problem is that everyone is trying to solve the new decentralized financial system within the framework of the old proven monetary system. This mistake is made by everyone who is trying to come up with another stable coin by tying it to the dollar or another Fiat. Satoshi proposed another solution for the development of a new decentralized economy and everyone together undertook to link Bitcoin to the Dollar, everyone began to print their own stable coins without understanding the basics of the value of decentralized finance, this is the same as the treasury began to print dollar No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, etc. as much as necessary and we will do.
I solved this problem with my project by creating an example of an asset that under no circumstances can be devalued because it is not tied to Fiat, which means it cannot be reset.
Give me some time to go through your work and understand exactly what it's about.
Are you a programmer?
Central means controlled specifically by someone.
The World Bank is a Decentralized Bank with no center, managed simultaneously by all its co–owners, wherever they are. This bank, accumulating the financial asset of its owners, brings profit to everyone. Its main advantage is that it cannot be bankrupted.
Decentralization has no center.
A truly Decentralized Bank with no center should be very difficult to centralize. There are several things that disqualify World Bank from being considered a Decentrized Bank, eg Privacy/Anonimity of owners, barrier of entry etc
I mean those who control a decentralized system should be anonymous, or their privacy should be well protected otherwise a bad actor who wants to centralize the system could easily hunt them down and get them to surrender control & do whatever he wants them to do. I developed a project that not only anonymize participants but regularly randomize them to make such takeover almost impossible, yet the participants can be punished when they try to hurt the system while being anonymous.
Anonymity needs to be guaranteed to participants to prevent a takeover and centralization a decentralized system.
Victor, I'm talking about Decentralized Network that allows participants to be anonymous. As far as I tell, you can't identify typical Node runners by their names, better still a Network does not identify you by your real name (maybe Google the dictionary meaning of anonymous)... Participants can be Anonymous according to Satoshi. In certain cases, participants could use their addresses instead of names.
In regards to randomization, that could be used to enhance privacy/anonymity feature of a decentralized network by making it hard for bad actors to ide-anonymize their person of interest
The OP has a solution which is looking for a problem.
In other words, he is full of crap.
You don't need a smart contract to accomplish this. Bitcoin is doing it already and it is the ultimate smart contract. It is decentralized, it can't be seized, it deflationary. Bitcoin is the ultimate decentralized world bank and you are participating whenever you use it. You just don't need anything else. Don't make this unnecessarily complicated.
In other words, he is full of crap.
You don't need a smart contract to accomplish this. Bitcoin is doing it already and it is the ultimate smart contract. It is decentralized, it can't be seized, it deflationary. Bitcoin is the ultimate decentralized world bank and you are participating whenever you use it. You just don't need anything else. Don't make this unnecessarily complicated.
At first glance, it seems logical, but if you drop deeper, it turns out that the bulk of all bitcoins are in the hands of a very narrow circle of people who manage volatility and increase their share even more with the help of manipulation. To counter this, there is currently no insurance, so banks do not lend for fear of losing their assets. In my project, this insurance is available for banks.
To activate tokens in BSC which is currently the most popular only costs around $2500, of course this is a good opportunity for anyone to create a project and with a capital of around $1 million it is enough to pump at the beginning and then get a fast RoI.
But what’s the point in this project if we already have several such projects lying around. What’s the difference between yours and the one that already exists. Starting from the bitcoin itself we have encountered whole new arena of co-ownership of the decentralised world bank. Every individual holding small to heavy balances in terms of bitcoin is already owning their bank and free from the centralised bank’s regulations. So apart from this any new project that comes up would be added advantage for us.
That's it! Added advantage. Maybe that's the one that we can get from his project but for us that are already contented on what older projects has to offer and we are too conscious about our security then we can just stick on them and there is no need for us to try newly created projects no matter offers they have as we didn't know that what if those new projects are not decentralized as the bitcoin and other old projects?The idea of having a decentralized world bank still won't make sense but it seems that I am right because if we read the title of the thread again, it says "co-owner", so it means they are still the one that controls most of our funds. Geez I don't like that, sorry.
A crypto bank is a network of individual smart contracts, united by a common control over the emission of bond tokens, managed jointly by all owners of the ETH deposit and by no one in particular. Anyone who has placed financial assets in a deposit at their address in a smart contract can become a co-owner of a crypto bank.
Central banks are usually owned by the country they operate in. If the would start selling shares to the public and try to become a public company, that would be nice. Personally I would definitely invest in a central bank. Their funding comes from the government and their loans to commercial banks are usually backed by the government as well. It's a pretty solid business model with a lot of government guarantees. A great way to make money for the owners.
I really agree with you that Central Bank of a nation belong to that particular contract but from my understanding I understand that Central Bank of nation is not entitled to have shares or shares to the public because share is something of of company not of a government sector accentra bank when we talk of Central Bank it is a place we are a country or a nation general fund is stored , because any of the state branches so it's not something but someone can say a share 
Central banks are usually owned by the country they operate in. If the would start selling shares to the public and try to become a public company, that would be nice. Personally I would definitely invest in a central bank. Their funding comes from the government and their loans to commercial banks are usually backed by the government as well. It's a pretty solid business model with a lot of government guarantees. A great way to make money for the owners.
I really agree with you that Central Bank of a nation belong to that particular contract but from my understanding I understand that Central Bank of nation is not entitled to have shares or shares to the public because share is something of of company not of a government sector accentra bank when we talk of Central Bank it is a place we are a country or a nation general fund is stored , because any of the state branches so it's not something but someone can say a share What is the main problem you want to solve with this? What makes you think more problems won't be created trying to solve the problem.
Do you have examples of assets that do not or will not lose value?
Your idea is very interesting though
Do you have examples of assets that do not or will not lose value?
Your idea is very interesting though
Good question.
In my opinion, the main problem is that everyone is trying to solve the new decentralized financial system within the framework of the old proven monetary system. This mistake is made by everyone who is trying to come up with another stable coin by tying it to the dollar or another Fiat. Satoshi proposed another solution for the development of a new decentralized economy and everyone together undertook to link Bitcoin to the Dollar, everyone began to print their own stable coins without understanding the basics of the value of decentralized finance, this is the same as the treasury began to print dollar No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, etc. as much as necessary and we will do.
I solved this problem with my project by creating an example of an asset that under no circumstances can be devalued because it is not tied to Fiat, which means it cannot be reset.
Give me some time to go through your work and understand exactly what it's about.
Are you a programmer?
Central means controlled specifically by someone.
The World Bank is a Decentralized Bank with no center, managed simultaneously by all its co–owners, wherever they are. This bank, accumulating the financial asset of its owners, brings profit to everyone. Its main advantage is that it cannot be bankrupted.
Decentralization has no center.
A truly Decentralized Bank with no center should be very difficult to centralize. There are several things that disqualify World Bank from being considered a Decentrized Bank, eg Privacy/Anonimity of owners, barrier of entry etc
I mean those who control a decentralized system should be anonymous, or their privacy should be well protected otherwise a bad actor who wants to centralize the system could easily hunt them down and get them to surrender control & do whatever he wants them to do. I developed a project that not only anonymize participants but regularly randomize them to make such takeover almost impossible, yet the participants can be punished when they try to hurt the system while being anonymous.
Anonymity needs to be guaranteed to participants to prevent a takeover and centralization a decentralized system.
The project completely lacks any regulator. The main advantage of the project is that the owners of ETH manage their financial assets without transferring them on their own to anything other than their addresses connected to the smart contract, or only for the necessary initial connection, and also if they only need bond tokens.
Placed ETH in the depository cannot be stolen from the addresses of the owners connected to the smart contract, as it is blocked, which provides additional insurance for invested funds.
A crypto bank is a network of individual smart contracts, united by a common control over the emission of bond tokens, managed jointly by all owners of the ETH deposit and by no one in particular. Anyone who has placed financial assets in a deposit at their address in a smart contract can become a co-owner of a crypto bank.
But what’s the point in this project if we already have several such projects lying around. What’s the difference between yours and the one that already exists. Starting from the bitcoin itself we have encountered whole new arena of co-ownership of the decentralised world bank. Every individual holding small to heavy balances in terms of bitcoin is already owning their bank and free from the centralised bank’s regulations. So apart from this any new project that comes up would be added advantage for us.
That's it! Added advantage. Maybe that's the one that we can get from his project but for us that are already contented on what older projects has to offer and we are too conscious about our security then we can just stick on them and there is no need for us to try newly created projects no matter offers they have as we didn't know that what if those new projects are not decentralized as the bitcoin and other old projects?The idea of having a decentralized world bank still won't make sense but it seems that I am right because if we read the title of the thread again, it says "co-owner", so it means they are still the one that controls most of our funds. Geez I don't like that, sorry.
The OP has a solution which is looking for a problem.
In other words, he is full of crap.
You don't need a smart contract to accomplish this. Bitcoin is doing it already and it is the ultimate smart contract. It is decentralized, it can't be seized, it deflationary. Bitcoin is the ultimate decentralized world bank and you are participating whenever you use it. You just don't need anything else. Don't make this unnecessarily complicated.
In other words, he is full of crap.
You don't need a smart contract to accomplish this. Bitcoin is doing it already and it is the ultimate smart contract. It is decentralized, it can't be seized, it deflationary. Bitcoin is the ultimate decentralized world bank and you are participating whenever you use it. You just don't need anything else. Don't make this unnecessarily complicated.
What is the main problem you want to solve with this? What makes you think more problems won't be created trying to solve the problem.
Do you have examples of assets that do not or will not lose value?
Your idea is very interesting though
Do you have examples of assets that do not or will not lose value?
Your idea is very interesting though
Good question.
In my opinion, the main problem is that everyone is trying to solve the new decentralized financial system within the framework of the old proven monetary system. This mistake is made by everyone who is trying to come up with another stable coin by tying it to the dollar or another Fiat. Satoshi proposed another solution for the development of a new decentralized economy and everyone together undertook to link Bitcoin to the Dollar, everyone began to print their own stable coins without understanding the basics of the value of decentralized finance, this is the same as the treasury began to print dollar No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, etc. as much as necessary and we will do.
I solved this problem with my project by creating an example of an asset that under no circumstances can be devalued because it is not tied to Fiat, which means it cannot be reset.
Give me some time to go through your work and understand exactly what it's about.
Are you a programmer?
Central means controlled specifically by someone.
The World Bank is a Decentralized Bank with no center, managed simultaneously by all its co–owners, wherever they are. This bank, accumulating the financial asset of its owners, brings profit to everyone. Its main advantage is that it cannot be bankrupted.
Decentralization has no center.
A truly Decentralized Bank with no center should be very difficult to centralize. There are several things that disqualify World Bank from being considered a Decentrized Bank, eg Privacy/Anonimity of owners, barrier of entry etc
I mean those who control a decentralized system should be anonymous, or their privacy should be well protected otherwise a bad actor who wants to centralize the system could easily hunt them down and get them to surrender control & do whatever he wants them to do. I developed a project that not only anonymize participants but regularly randomize them to make such takeover almost impossible, yet the participants can be punished when they try to hurt the system while being anonymous.
Anonymity needs to be guaranteed to participants to prevent a takeover and centralization a decentralized system.
What is the main problem you want to solve with this? What makes you think more problems won't be created trying to solve the problem.
Do you have examples of assets that do not or will not lose value?
Your idea is very interesting though
Do you have examples of assets that do not or will not lose value?
Your idea is very interesting though
Good question.
In my opinion, the main problem is that everyone is trying to solve the new decentralized financial system within the framework of the old proven monetary system. This mistake is made by everyone who is trying to come up with another stable coin by tying it to the dollar or another Fiat. Satoshi proposed another solution for the development of a new decentralized economy and everyone together undertook to link Bitcoin to the Dollar, everyone began to print their own stable coins without understanding the basics of the value of decentralized finance, this is the same as the treasury began to print dollar No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, etc. as much as necessary and we will do.
I solved this problem with my project by creating an example of an asset that under no circumstances can be devalued because it is not tied to Fiat, which means it cannot be reset.
Give me some time to go through your work and understand exactly what it's about.
Are you a programmer?
Central means controlled specifically by someone.
The World Bank is a Decentralized Bank with no center, managed simultaneously by all its co–owners, wherever they are. This bank, accumulating the financial asset of its owners, brings profit to everyone. Its main advantage is that it cannot be bankrupted.
Decentralization has no center.
A truly Decentralized Bank with no center should be very difficult to centralize. There are several things that disqualify World Bank from being considered a Decentrized Bank, eg Privacy/Anonimity of owners, barrier of entry etc
What is the main problem you want to solve with this? What makes you think more problems won't be created trying to solve the problem.
Do you have examples of assets that do not or will not lose value?
Your idea is very interesting though
Do you have examples of assets that do not or will not lose value?
Your idea is very interesting though
Good question.
In my opinion, the main problem is that everyone is trying to solve the new decentralized financial system within the framework of the old proven monetary system. This mistake is made by everyone who is trying to come up with another stable coin by tying it to the dollar or another Fiat. Satoshi proposed another solution for the development of a new decentralized economy and everyone together undertook to link Bitcoin to the Dollar, everyone began to print their own stable coins without understanding the basics of the value of decentralized finance, this is the same as the treasury began to print dollar No. 1, No. 2, No. 3, etc. as much as necessary and we will do.
I solved this problem with my project by creating an example of an asset that under no circumstances can be devalued because it is not tied to Fiat, which means it cannot be reset.
Give me some time to go through your work and understand exactly what it's about.
Are you a programmer?
Central means controlled specifically by someone.
The World Bank is a Decentralized Bank with no center, managed simultaneously by all its co–owners, wherever they are. This bank, accumulating the financial asset of its owners, brings profit to everyone. Its main advantage is that it cannot be bankrupted.
Decentralization has no center.
A truly Decentralized Bank with no center should be very difficult to centralize. There are several things that disqualify World Bank from being considered a Decentrized Bank, eg Privacy/Anonimity of owners, barrier of entry etc
Jump to: