Post
Topic
Board Altcoin Discussion
Re: IDEAL: no ICOs, no proof-of-work, no proof-of-stake, no governance, and no forks
by
MarketMagic
on 26/06/2016, 13:18:28 UTC
This thread is not intended to be about any specific crypto project, nor claim that these ideals are the only way forward. Because for one reason, no one has yet shown that these ideals are plausible.

I just want to explain my reasons for setting these ideals as the goals from my crypto work and open these goals to discussion. Any project I launch will be attempting to achieve these goals. The following summaries are not intended to be exhaustive nor present counter arguments. This thread is unmoderated, so you all can add your thoughts.

One of my motivations for creating this post, is to gather the past couple of weeks of my discussion into one coherent post, for my own future reference.

Readers should click all the links in this OP, to get the full flavor behind these summaries.

1.No ICOs: ICOs enable insiders to buy from themselves, creating a non-free market distribution of the money supply, thus manipulating all the market parameters and effects creating a controlled, non-free market.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1524111.msg15340159#msg15340159
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1413819.msg15343686#msg15343686
2.No (Satoshi) Proof-of-work: Proof-of-work concentrates the money supply, economic profits, and control to the mining farms (esp. those with electricity subsidies). Meet your new central bank masters, the mining cartel. Permissionless, trustless attributes are lost, e.g. forks are possible. Since all the debasement ends up with the rich via mining, the system has no countervailing mechanism to recirculate the money supply to prevent it from losing its attribute as a unit-of-exchange for the broad public. Proof-of-work launches provide no funding for the core developers, unless they are accomplished with premine, instamine, stealthmine, or non-optimized proof-of-work function deceptions.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1524286.msg15342314#msg15342314
3.No Proof-of-Stake: The brutality-of-the-majority (aka democracy) applies. Permissionless, trustless attributes are lost, e.g. forks are possible. No changes of the ICO token distribution share can be accomplished via mining, thus the system has no countervailing mechanism to recirculate the money supply to prevent it from losing its attribute as a unit-of-exchange for the broad public.
4.No governance: Foundations and governance are just bringing the brutality-of-the-majority (aka democracy) to what should be permissionless, trustless. If democracy was going to save us, why has it never done so in 6000 years.
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1524286.msg15352261#msg15352261
5.No forks: no one, not even miner's should have the brutality-of-the-majority power to break the Nash equilibrium and vote on a fork:
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1520678.msg15335354#msg15335354
https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1516067.msg15285558#msg15285558
6.No Marginable Exchanges: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=1526067.msg15363845#msg15363845




So maybe you have your own ideas how to launch a coin and make money. If you have new approaches, good for you.

No comment.  Wink

Yes smooth I have some new magic1 for launching a token system fairly yet also funding the developer. Not an ICO, not proof-of-work, and not some obfuscation of an ICO which has the negative implications of an ICO I enumerate in #1 above.

Note I don't see any need to eliminate having a set of core developers, as I don't see how any development can proceed without them. I would encourage those developers to not cultivate nor employ their political clout to facilitate forks. Note ecosystem development can proceed without the need for a fork.

1 “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.”— Arthur C. Clarke

My new favourite thread on BCT.