I was reading the thread of mining cartel vs banking cartel etc where you and other very smart guys argue and I have a headache since that is too much academic stuff for me, and also my monitor is broken and im in some old ass 17 inch CRT going blind since i cant afford a new one for now.
Those discussions are very technically detailed with deep game theory, economics theory, and blockchain expertise, thus it would be difficult to follow (even for myself if I had tried to read that in 2013). We could explain all that to you in simpler language if we had time to summarize it, but it isn't my priority right now to make sure everyone understands all those technical details. That discussion you referred to also made me exhausted. I have stopped that discussion now, as I convinced myself that OpenShare is absolutely needed for decentralized scaling on unlimited transactions, not just payment transactions but many of the decentralized database transactions on the Internet, such as replacing many of the websites you use now with a decentralized database including Facebook, StackExchange, Google Playstore, GitHub, etc..
You said you have 25 BTC and a 19" flatscreen sells for 0.15 BTC. I think given crypto investing is your current vocation, perhaps consider it a wise expense.
I can't guarantee it, but my read of the chart is that ETH will outperform BTC. Remember I told you and everyone I bought it at $45 a few days ago, and now it is $52.
XMR also looks like a solid speculation after recent pullback, especially on any pullback to $15 (I won't pull the trigger until that dip bcz I am satisfied with holding ETH).
Anyway something I noticed is how you basically claim bitcoin is doomed because whales control it.
My question is: how do you then pretend to stop the formation of whales in your coin?
From what I can gather you solved the entire PoW mining cartel thing cause there is no mining per se in your coin, not sure how that works but anyway, assuming that is the case and your coin is solid without the usual PoW (or other existing methods) problems, what about the whales then?
In every free market there are going to be whales since people expect big rewards by taking the big risk of being a really early investor of something (if it takes off and is a success). So what treats can whales pose?
For near-term protection of intellectual property reasons, I am not ready to reveal the specific design of the OpenShare blockchain and consensus algorithm, although it will all be revealed and open sourced eventually (we really need to accelerate the coding). Again, no ICO is planned, so I am not obscuring to try to trick any speculators.
But I can give you a general description for now, which might satiate your curiosity for the time being.
The OpenShare design doesn't attempt to prevent a power-law distribution of the tokens (i.e. whales) because that would not be possible to prevent. Power-law (or exponential) distribution of resources is the norm in nature. The tokens will be distributed to the app devs, users, and content producers, so we aren't necessarily distributing them to whales initially. The distribution will be meritocracy where those who receive tokens do so because of some objectively verifiable "work" they provided to the ecosystem. Speculators will have to buy them from those groups.
Instead the design (in theory) makes it impossible for the whales to force onto to the rest of the users what the protocol will be, and it makes it impossible for any node in the system to misbehave because the system objectively detects malevolence and routes around it without employing PoW. Think of my design as a hive of bees, that routes around obstacles or attacks and attacker. That hive acts as one brain, but no one can control it, because it isn't voting (and thus doesn't have
the problem of voting). Contrast this with for example how
the whales in Bitcoin can dominate the economic rewards of the blocks and then make sure only their approved miners get those rewards.
I don't want to try to characterize the difference in security comparing OpenShare vs. PoW, because I think my design is comparable in security, but this needs to be heavily peer reviewed because the game theory for new consensus designs is very complex. Really you should trust nothing until it has been heavily peer reviewed. But any way, when we launch there won't be a lot of value at stake and the peer review will come before there is a lot of value invested into the system.
Another question I have is, how does your project defend against someone with enough resources to convince enough people to support a fork of your coin and try to make this fork the "official OpenShare"? (similar situation we are seeing now with bitcoin where the other camp tries to take over and steal the brand)
That is why I won't make it open source immediately. Once we have say 10,000 users then we'll have enough of a lead. Once we reach critical mass of 10,000 users, we'll probably quickly reach 100,000 then a million. That assumes we have plenty of apps ready. So I am hoping we can interest some app developers to be in early on this. They will get so many tokens if they do and become likely very wealthy. If I have to write the initial apps myself, this won't get launched in 2017.
I want to get the forum operating asap so I can start working with app devs.
Also yes you should create a forum and so on. opensharetalk.com is registered. openshareforum.com is not that is a good one.
I was thinking just to put the forum on the main domain in a subdirectory or forum.opensha.re.
Did I answer your questions? Feedback is appreciated from readers.
(Note my forehead on keyboard sleepy while writing this so please excuse any errors in the prose)
Yes this was helpful. About the monitor, yes I can afford one if I sell some BTC, but id rather wait till I can get enough fiat. I dont have 25 BTC i wish, I got 2 figures but less than that... I cant afford spending any BTCs. Im on super frugal mode. I think next month I will be able to get a new monitor anyway.
My dream is to somehow get rich from crypto and cash out in another country where I don't get raped heavily by taxes and live a stress free life. Of course im far from that and that just remains a dream.
Also I was about to ask what Fatoshi asked: "how do we us, the 99% of people that don't know how to code, get rich from spotting a good idea that is a success?" Aka how an investor gets rich when investors don't know how to code and just move capital.
What was so cool about bitcoin is, even some NEET that is a HS drop out and doesn't know how to code a helloworld but was able to intuitively see the importance of bitcoin, was free to get in and mine it or buy it when it was worth pennies, then get rich as fuck for this act of spotting a great idea before the rest does.
In your model, from what I can understand, PoW is replaced by "proof of meritocracy", which means if you are not a coder, you are fucked since you can't be a miner.
You described tho that users can do some other things to still get money, but are we taking rich tier money rewards? because that's what you expect if you get involved in a project pretty much since the first day, but it's sounding to me like only the people creating the apps are going to get the big bread.
What does the user do? Fatoshi pointed to "likes", driving traffic to an app, promoting it and whatnot... this all seems too diffuse compared to the simple act of firing up your CPU to mine bitcoins (as you could if you spotted the good idea of bitcoin back in the day, and I know I could have been one of those kids that just finished HS and heard about bitcoin in 2009 and got rich as a mf but I didn't until 2013 so I hate my life since then).
By the time the coin gets listed in an exchange, app creators will be the whales and marketmakers. Investors that don't know how to code may be able to buy a good chunk for cheap there, but the big money is already hodled by app developers just like it was by early bitcoin miners.
Im probably missing something but I just don't see how the early user or the early investor gets to become rich by getting involved early, the app creators looks like are the ones that will get the big payday.
Also: what if someone starts releasing apps that are shit or are basically clones, then spreads it by use of marketing to get a ton of likes, downloads and whatnot (not sure how the "merit" will be measured, but it has to be something measurable like likes, downloads etc, can't think of anything else), and the thing becomes a store of crap just like Google apps where some people get rich from apps that are ridiculous but become viral memes? im not sure where the meritocracy is there, it seems like a race to see who is the best marketer all over again. This could be a way to game the model that I can think off.
Also: Bitnet sounds great to me. I remember Andreas A claiming how the "Bitcoin" name makes no sense since there are no coins because its keys and he suggested something similar. I think Bitcoin is a great name nonetheless and very brandable. I don't think the end user gives a fuck about the fact that there are no actual coins and is juts the ledger and the private-public keys and so on, the end users sees "coins" and that's all that matters, so I think bitcoin is a great name and Andreas since he is too much of a nerd doesn't seem to realize that. But nonetheless Bitnet sounds good. OpenShare also sounds good but reminds me a bit of a download site like "megaupload", "dropbox" and those sites.
Bitnet sounds like "Bitcoin" and everyone is dreaming to get in early on the actual "bitcoin 2.0". So if you can really pull this off, the name is cool. I would get bitnet.org and put the wallet and software and everything there just like bitcoin.org
Also the BITS token is used by coin "Bitstar" so not sure about using that same token.