Quote from: FinShaggy on May 28, 2013, 05:16:08 PM

Quote from: Vlad2Vlad on May 28, 2013, 06:01:21 AM

Luckybit,

Can you give me a quick answer to a couple questions for which I cannot find any good answer. This is relevant to the value and future of tokens such as devcoin which is why I'm asking it here and not in PM.

1) Since you cleared these are tokens which does change a lot with my own personal theories I'm hoping you can add some color to what I've been searching for.

2) What's your take on the incredibly stable bitcoin token, an utterly worthless video game token showing incredible strength and price stability at well above $120. From an econ point of view it's not possible for this length of time so maybe you can add some new perspective. I firmly believe the natural forces exacerbated after a few weeks and it is now being propped up, but for what purpose, by artificial means....but who and for what purpose, again?

3) These tokens are known about by maybe 1% of the population, and I mean, known as in knowledge not some quick thing they heard on channel 12 news. So it's only a matter of time before awareness explodes and goes logarithmic and depending the number of tokens on the market at the time most if not all coins can stand to gain massive price appreciation, especially one such as devcoin which has a large following. What's your take on this theory of mine and the possibility of it actually happening in my timeframe of 6-18 months or so?

4) Tokens are different than money but I think from the physics and economics point, such as supply and demand, velocity of money, turn over rate, etc,. these tokens should behave closely to the same model as money since in essence they can be treated as fiat money at some point so then their price can appreciate based on the same theories which govern the current market value of any fiat currency. What's your take on that and perhaps a timeframe?

Thanks in advance.

regards,

Vlad

I wouldn't say money is completely different than tokens.

Enter token, get service... Tokens are really just local currency. REALLY local.

Exactly. Tokens are like tickets. You want to get on the train or bus? You buy a token. You want to gamble? Buy some chips. It's not going to gain in value over the years and it's not designed for you to keep your money in it for long periods of time. It's not designed for you to actually spend it either, it's for a specific purpose within a narrow focus of a community.

Devcoin is like that. It only exists as a support structure for Bitcoin until Bitcoin has infrastructure to pay people in Bitcoins and then Devcoin is done. No one is going to choose to get paid in Devcoins over Bitcoins just because theres an octillion Devcoins. And the moment someone comes along and forks Devcoin and adds the ability for the tokens/coupons to expire is the moment Devcoin becomes second best. Nothing is wrong with infinite inflation if the inflation is nice and slow, and if there is an expiration date. Devcoins seem to have no expiration date and are generated so fast that I cannot see how it will work up against a fork which has expiration built in.

Quote from: ranlo on May 28, 2013, 04:23:21 PM

I am 100% against the destruction of coins. This creates way too many problems. You should be able to hold some for use whenever you want, without being forced to utilize them. This is part of what creates value.

I think what needs to be done is slow down the creation of new coins. We need some way to determine how many should be made and use that to continue on. Every month or so it should be re-evaluated and altered as necessary. This will help keep the total number of coins in check, without causing problems by taking away what people have already earned. Inflation (or deflation in the form of the currency's value) will handle that all on its own, and is a much more efficient determinant.

Devcoin isn't a coin, it's a token/coupon. Coupons expire when the sale is over. That is how it works. If you're 100% against the destruction of "coins" that statement is too vague. I'm assuming you're against the destruction of Devcoins? I'm for it. I think Devcoins should deteriorate and self destruct over a period of time. This will encourage Devcoins to be used for what they are designed to be used for, which isn't a commodity. Commodities don't have infinite amounts of inflation if they are supposed to be a store of value. So why pretend like Devcoin is gold or silver? It's not a precious metal, it's not a commodity. The only purpose of having Devcoins is to trade them for Bitcoins as soon as possible. If Devcoins self destruct then it encourages people to trade them in as soon as possible which is better in my opinion if you're going to generate an unlimited amount and generate at such a high rate. The last thing we would want is to have millions of people with trillions of Devcoins hoarding them so the price can swing way up and then dumping them all at once so the price can dip down to less than 1/1000th of a cent. This kind of volatility is bad for something like Devcoin where people are expecting to earn a reasonable amount of money for labor and stability is everything.

If a case can be made for why Devcoin can have an infinite supply of tokens, that never self destruct, (even paper currency deteriorates and even coupons expire), then please make the case. If we look at nature the way nature balances life forms with fast metabolisms and generation rates is that they don't live as long. Basically nature keeps the balance by saying if you generate billions a month, you only live for 6 months anyway. If it wasn't like this then we'd be overwhelmed by insects that will live forever and reproduce in the trillion trillion trillions. I think you can see why it does not scale.

Quote from: TaxReturn on May 28, 2013, 10:55:36 AM

I think the concept of Freicoin's demurrage is intriguing, they basically selfdestruct at a fixed percentage over time. Such a demurrage could be added to devcoin (or rather a follow up) and the generation of new coins balanced with the demurrage to keep the total number of coins steady in the long run.

Combined with devcoin's 90% model, this would allow a foundation to constantly hand out coins for work, because the generation would never cease, while making the coins valuable. To keep a certain amount of coins one would either have to work for them constantly or buy more of them... I'm not sure if this would work out over a long time span, but the current non-stop process is guaranteed to make devcoins worthless in the future.

I agree with this 100%.