Quote from: cellard on October 12, 2018, 02:25:33 AM

Since you are aiming for Communism, how would you stop elites forming which would hold big amounts of the total supply (capital) of the supposed 100 billiards?

If you somehow hardcoded that a wallet cannot sustain more than X amount of coins, then why would there be any demand for this coin?

And the classic problems of cryptocurrencies (being open source while avoiding hard-forking clusterfucks, protecting against 51% attacks and whatnot) still prevail.

The communism part will be implemented at a later phase of the protocol, and could be something like what social democrats are doing or what you suggest ( X limit for holding coins ). what i was thinking is A progressive transaction commission according to the transaction amount ( the bigger the transaction the bigger the commission ) which will be equally spread between verified wallets. The commission % will have no limit for increase but at the same time will allow the beneficiary get the amount he might wish to seek. Although the beneficiary will have a limit of what he can get from one transaction as total capital is limited. Transactions will be attached to change of ownership of any type of asset registered in the blocknet. This will put a 'natural' maximum limit on a price of anything, thus it will be possible accumulated capital between everyone equally which will create a safe net for everyone's consumption ability which would be by far exceeding their needs although wont satisfy all potential wants (which is still an utopia part for me knowing that it is currently a spread human nature to always want more). However such a system will enable capitalists accumulating above average amount of capital by any commerce, thus leaving a limited capitalism alive within this communism.

Hope I answered your questions, however am waiting to hear more doubts.

KryptoKomsamol

Posts

Merits