Author Topic: Dividends 2.0 - A Simplified Implementation of Dividends and Honest Blockchains  (Read 9314 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline super3

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 260
    • View Profile
This concept will work perfectly for Protoshares and onwards. I think other "more spendable" Cryptocurrencies will have problems this. Dynamically changing balances would perhaps make it very hard to price items.

Actually pricing becomes easier because you will have more price stability by removing the inflation from the mix.   

For currencies like BTC the wallet would probably want to price things in USD because then they will still see their balance going up despite the 12% APR inflati
Perhaps you could use this in another way. Call them StableShares or CentralShares. Basically you have an algorithm or voting board that can create or destroy coins. The idea is to keep one share equal to some amount of agreed spending power. If we want move forward in the Cryptocurrency movement, we need to stop using USD as a crutch, and instead use our own analog.

Perhaps you don't actually need a coin. Perhaps this could be reduced to an index. Although the DAC idea would of course fund itself. 

Offline bytemaster

This concept will work perfectly for Protoshares and onwards. I think other "more spendable" Cryptocurrencies will have problems this. Dynamically changing balances would perhaps make it very hard to price items.

Actually pricing becomes easier because you will have more price stability by removing the inflation from the mix.   

For currencies like BTC the wallet would probably want to price things in USD because then they will still see their balance going up despite the 12% APR inflati
Perhaps you could use this in another way. Call them StableShares or CentralShares. Basically you have an algorithm or voting board that can create or destroy coins. The idea is to keep one share equal to some amount of agreed spending power. If we want move forward in the Cryptocurrency movement, we need to stop using USD as a crutch, and instead use our own analog.

Perhaps you don't actually need a coin. Perhaps this could be reduced to an index. Although the DAC idea would of course fund itself.

Pricing things relative to a known stable quantity, perhaps OZ of gold helps.  BitShares handles the pegging against a known value so no point in creating a new system. 
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline super3

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 260
    • View Profile
This concept will work perfectly for Protoshares and onwards. I think other "more spendable" Cryptocurrencies will have problems this. Dynamically changing balances would perhaps make it very hard to price items.

Actually pricing becomes easier because you will have more price stability by removing the inflation from the mix.   

For currencies like BTC the wallet would probably want to price things in USD because then they will still see their balance going up despite the 12% APR inflati
Perhaps you could use this in another way. Call them StableShares or CentralShares. Basically you have an algorithm or voting board that can create or destroy coins. The idea is to keep one share equal to some amount of agreed spending power. If we want move forward in the Cryptocurrency movement, we need to stop using USD as a crutch, and instead use our own analog.

Perhaps you don't actually need a coin. Perhaps this could be reduced to an index. Although the DAC idea would of course fund itself.

Pricing things relative to a known stable quantity, perhaps OZ of gold helps.  BitShares handles the pegging against a known value so no point in creating a new system.
Basically just Bitshares v0.1, just because of ease of implementation. I say fill the market gap till BitShares arrives.

Offline phoenix

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 275
    • View Profile
So, is this just a way to help users more easily visualize their gains from dividends, and their losses from inflation? As well as make things easier for you to code?
Protoshares: Pg5EhSZEXHFjdFUzpxJbm91UtA54iUuDvt
Bitmessage: BM-NBrGi2V3BZ8REnJM7FPxUjjkQp7V5D28

Offline super3

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 260
    • View Profile
So, is this just a way to help users more easily visualize their gains from dividends, and their losses from inflation? As well as make things easier for you to code?
Yup.

Offline freeworld

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
I don't believe it's fair to say that BTC has a 10% yearly inflation.  The total supply is 21 million coins that's what Satoshi decided.

If Satoshi released all 21 million coins right away (or at least within the first year), then we would have 0% inflation since the cap has been reached.  What difference does it make if the 21 million units are released gradually or all at once (besides the fact that releasing all at once would be terrible).

If I make another btc clone and flood the market with 21 million coins, is it even fair to say that my coin has zero inflation and BTC has 10% inflation?


Offline bytemaster

I don't believe it's fair to say that BTC has a 10% yearly inflation.  The total supply is 21 million coins that's what Satoshi decided.

If Satoshi released all 21 million coins right away (or at least within the first year), then we would have 0% inflation since the cap has been reached.  What difference does it make if the 21 million units are released gradually or all at once (besides the fact that releasing all at once would be terrible).

If I make another btc clone and flood the market with 21 million coins, is it even fair to say that my coin has zero inflation and BTC has 10% inflation?

Your right, BTC has 12% yearly inflation :)     

All that matters is potential 'coins in circulation'.  Every time a new coin is mined someone has financial incentive to sell to cover the cost of mining and this selling pressure devalues the coin.  Imagine what would happen to BTC price if miners were not dumping on the market?
 
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline freeworld

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 7
    • View Profile
Your right, BTC has 12% yearly inflation :)     

All that matters is potential 'coins in circulation'.  Every time a new coin is mined someone has financial incentive to sell to cover the cost of mining and this selling pressure devalues the coin.  Imagine what would happen to BTC price if miners were not dumping on the market?

This is true and the same thing could be said for gold as well, the supply also expands.  However, too low of a supply wouldn't be meaningful to anyone.  What if there was only 1kg of gold for the whole world?

Offline bytemaster

Divisibility is more important than supply.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline phoenix

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 275
    • View Profile
Divisibility is more important than supply.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, but people are more used to dealing with large amounts of money than very small units.
Protoshares: Pg5EhSZEXHFjdFUzpxJbm91UtA54iUuDvt
Bitmessage: BM-NBrGi2V3BZ8REnJM7FPxUjjkQp7V5D28

Offline liberman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 85
    • View Profile
Inflation in Bitcoin is not perceived because the real value of the currency in relation to goods and other currencies is increasing very fast on average. From a point of view of a today user, s/he only sees that his/her coins gain in value over time, perceiving that as a fake deflation.
Infation is only a problem when you reach certain stability in real market shares, or when the decline starts. For example, what is happening to the dollar right now.

In my opinion, the ideal currency is the one which is able to expand/shrink (inflate itself by increasing/decreasing money supply) in the same ratio as market/exchange adoption does happen. So if you have 1 dollar today and are able to buy 1kg of apples, the ideal is that 20 years from now you can also buy 1kg of apples with 1 dollar.
This stability has many advantages. The first one being able to take loans and pay in a predictable way.
Do you imagine taking a loan today in bitcoins at $1000, and having to pay it when it is at $100,000? You would fail to pay, and this happens because money supply (inflation) is just not enough to support the incredible demand.
But how to implement this in a virtual currency? It is a problem if we don't want centralization, and centralization is precisely the biggest problem we want to avoid, for political reasons.

Offline cgafeng

In this way, bta can't get any dividends.
BTC:1EYwcZ9cYVj6C9LMLafdcjK9wicVMDV376

Offline liberman

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 85
    • View Profile
Anyway, at least for some DACs, we have here a good opportunity to implement automatic demurrage based on actual, real demands.

For example, with WeTube we can implement a fixed ratio Gigabyte/WeCoins. If we always consider that sharing 1Gb will generate 1 WeCoin, inflation will always satisfy demand and we will not see what is happening with all altcoins today.
The original good parts of any demurrage system is that the ratio between man-working-hours and money earned is fixed, so the system could be, in theory, very stable. Disadvantages are that it mostly kills speculation, but some will argue that that is a good thing.

I'd like to read opinions of economists about this option.

Offline bytemaster

Inflation in Bitcoin is not perceived because the real value of the currency in relation to goods and other currencies is increasing very fast on average. From a point of view of a today user, s/he only sees that his/her coins gain in value over time, perceiving that as a fake deflation.
Infation is only a problem when you reach certain stability in real market shares, or when the decline starts. For example, what is happening to the dollar right now.

In my opinion, the ideal currency is the one which is able to expand/shrink (inflate itself by increasing/decreasing money supply) in the same ratio as market/exchange adoption does happen. So if you have 1 dollar today and are able to buy 1kg of apples, the ideal is that 20 years from now you can also buy 1kg of apples with 1 dollar.
This stability has many advantages. The first one being able to take loans and pay in a predictable way.
Do you imagine taking a loan today in bitcoins at $1000, and having to pay it when it is at $100,000? You would fail to pay, and this happens because money supply (inflation) is just not enough to support the incredible demand.
But how to implement this in a virtual currency? It is a problem if we don't want centralization, and centralization is precisely the biggest problem we want to avoid, for political reasons.

BitUSD or BitApples solves this problem in a decentralized manner.   
For the latest updates checkout my blog: http://bytemaster.bitshares.org
Anything said on these forums does not constitute an intent to create a legal obligation or contract between myself and anyone else.   These are merely my opinions and I reserve the right to change them at any time.

Offline coolspeed

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 536
    • View Profile
    • My Blog
Inflation in Bitcoin is not perceived because the real value of the currency in relation to goods and other currencies is increasing very fast on average. From a point of view of a today user, s/he only sees that his/her coins gain in value over time, perceiving that as a fake deflation.
Infation is only a problem when you reach certain stability in real market shares, or when the decline starts. For example, what is happening to the dollar right now.

In my opinion, the ideal currency is the one which is able to expand/shrink (inflate itself by increasing/decreasing money supply) in the same ratio as market/exchange adoption does happen. So if you have 1 dollar today and are able to buy 1kg of apples, the ideal is that 20 years from now you can also buy 1kg of apples with 1 dollar.
This stability has many advantages. The first one being able to take loans and pay in a predictable way.
Do you imagine taking a loan today in bitcoins at $1000, and having to pay it when it is at $100,000? You would fail to pay, and this happens because money supply (inflation) is just not enough to support the incredible demand.
But how to implement this in a virtual currency? It is a problem if we don't want centralization, and centralization is precisely the biggest problem we want to avoid, for political reasons.

If you regard bts as a kind of META-currency more than altcoin, you can ignore this disadvantage. (What? META-currency? Am I creating concepts around again? )

But, can bitAssets gain dividends? And, should they?  ::)
« Last Edit: December 03, 2013, 11:55:35 am by coolspeed »
Please vote for  delegate.coolspeed    dac.coolspeed
BTS account: coolspeed
Sina Weibo:@coolspeed