Quote from: inBitweTrust on December 29, 2014, 02:51:51 PM

Quote from: Kisokos on December 29, 2014, 02:33:32 PM

The innovation here is the control of supply. That's huge. Huger than huge.

No, as a capitalist I do not agree with you that its a good thing to control the supply or set a base minimum price. Look at how well price controls and capital flight controls worked in Venezuela as a recent historical example. The fact that this control is being done by a centralized entity is even more concerning and the fact that the 100 million set aside to create this support in investor capital is likely a lie is still another concern.

I have to disagree. Controlling the supply by a centralized entity is how every fiat currency works, ever. Singling out an example when it failed does not invalidate the fact that the same thing is going on with USD, GBP, CHF, well, as I said, every fiat.
Setting a base price is somewhat unique to crypto - unless of course we think about examples like tieing USD to gold, or the current example of Bulgarian lev to EUR.

Quote from: inBitweTrust on December 29, 2014, 02:51:51 PM

Quote from: Kisokos on December 29, 2014, 02:33:32 PM

Just to be a grammar nazi here: having clients with lacking technical abilities is kind of the main point of making any crypto "real mainstream"

The clients I am referring to are the founders, investors and stakers not the average guy who wants to buy something.

Oh, OK. I thought it was just a grammar thing, and mis-ordering of words....
In that case I have to disagree again. "Founders"(=initial investors), normal investors, stakers, average joe, they are ALL in the same category to me.
They introduce fiat into the system - for different reasons of course, but it does not matter in this argument, as we were assessing the importance
of their technical ability. Which is zero. It's like BMW. Do you need to know how the latest BMW security systems, engine, transmission, etc works to buy a car? to buy shares in the company itself?

Quote from: inBitweTrust on December 29, 2014, 02:51:51 PM

Quote from: Kisokos on December 29, 2014, 02:33:32 PM

Or are we vetting PayCoin to replace every fiat ever? And If it can't it's a shitcoin & scam? I really don't think that's a valid argument.

You are getting ahead of yourself. Paycoin is competing with other cryptos, not so much fiat at the moment. Some of those cryptos are inflationary and some deflationary. I would posit that any inflationary coins need to have some serious innovation behind(I.E. Ethereum) it and not simply be a rebranded peercoin fork.. Our economics probably differ as you sound like a believer in keynesianism over other models so we will likely disagree on inflation in general.

Nah man, you were the one suggesting to use fiat if I want an inflatory medium

this was just a response to that, and it seems to have worked

Hmmmm, Innovation.
I've heard this a lot of times, from a lot of folks - coins with innovation will survive, coins without it will die horribly. Then I look at Doge.
Then I concluded that in my opinion, coins with active communities will survive. If the reason for this is technical innovation, good, could work. Or not. If the reason is much wow, then that is the reason.

Hmm, I wouldn't classify myself as a believer, however the keynesian view of public sector intervention (only when necessary) is somehow feels natural to me. Maybe I'm too old (grew up in that era)

Quote from: inBitweTrust on December 29, 2014, 02:51:51 PM

Quote from: Kisokos on December 29, 2014, 02:33:32 PM

Again, what? Did amazon already have this plugin and disable it? It's supposed to come out this week. Where's your info coming from?

This has been discussed heavily already. Do some research into coinfire and the original company legal issues which GAW purchased and renamed to paysave.

Duh, ok. I just heard half-truths and plain FUD from coinfire, so I stopped reading them & put in the pile of horseshit never to touch category.