Byteball did this. The problem is that when you give away coins for free to speculators, they are likely to sell them because they didn't decide to BURN anything (e.g. buy or do effort for it) for it, e.g. Auroracoin.
There's nothing wrong for them to sell it, on the contrary. The more a coin gets traded, the less it is concentrated in the hands of a few.
We can't give away for free that which is not free.
When Russia privatized the land after the fall of the Soviet union in Perestroika by giving it away free to people who didn't know how to own/steward/manage private land anymore, the rich bought up all the land, so there was less significant change in the top-down control of the economy than one might have hoped for.
Instead of harvesting high diversity of effort (i.e. true investment) with a viral distribution model, IMO Byteball is creating a low entropy speculation with too much top-down control at the nascent stage where it needs exponential distribution. Thus the probability of failure is much higher, i.e. the antifragility is very low.
You don't need people to "invest" in something. The only thing you need is a large list of non-identical crypto-identity holders, so that the initial distribution is as large as possible.
You have clearly demonstrated to me by now in our discussions over the past days that you entirely do not understand/appreciate the critical importance of the entropic force and the irreversibility of thermodynamic processes.
Replication is not the same as a diversity of irreversible paths. Replication is low entropy. You have a huge blindspot in this area of conceptualization and it is the source of your incorrect analysis on many issues. Sorry just being frank.
If it were possible to have, in one way or another, a public key of every person on earth, that would be the most ideal distribution.
Egalitarianism is the same as infinite entropy (in that everything is equiprobable and simultaneously absolute top-down order) which is the same as non-existence and a static universe.
It has to be a list "of the past".
Nicholas Taleb disagrees.