Jan Kučera [ARCHIVE] on Nostr: 📅 Original date posted:2013-12-10 📝 Original message:Hi there, I am not sure ...
📅 Original date posted:2013-12-10
📝 Original message:Hi there,
I am not sure this wont be considered as off-topic here, but I did not find
a better place to ask. My question is - has anybody here thought about the
idea of variable block rewards where mining would essentially be popularity
based? I mean in terms either improving Bitcoin's protocol or forking a
completely new coin? I think elasticity of money supply could bring more
exchange rate stability to the hypothetical new coin (say there'd be a
demand for such a coin). I am thinking of an alternative mining scheme
where block reward would grow (or decrease) with popularity of the coin.
The rationale behind this idea is to make an exchange rate more stable
since greater interest will not result in higher coin price.
Evidence clearly shows Bitcoin lacks some basic features of money and thus
behaves more like a commodity (read gold). I have been watching the
exchange rate for several months and the volatility simply does not seem to
go away... so it seems like something has to change in order to get a more
stable currency. I am not telling I want Bitcoin to implement this, I fully
understand that a philosophy of "one coin = never changing features" can be
present that is why I also speak about a fork.
Basically there would be no reliance on external data as the network itself
would decide on reward height and everybody node would be free to do so.
Each network node would determine the popularity on its own depending on
various factors (coin valuation/exchange rate, number of transactions and
many others) and basically come up with its own block reward value. It
would then want to see a new block being mined with such reward value. In
case such a block is mined, it will include it in its own chain. There'd be
some %s of tolerance for block reward value so that the system would not
collapse.
I may be completely wrong with my idea but am asking it this was spoken
before and what opinions do developers have.
Regards,
Jan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20131210/38578826/attachment.html>;
📝 Original message:Hi there,
I am not sure this wont be considered as off-topic here, but I did not find
a better place to ask. My question is - has anybody here thought about the
idea of variable block rewards where mining would essentially be popularity
based? I mean in terms either improving Bitcoin's protocol or forking a
completely new coin? I think elasticity of money supply could bring more
exchange rate stability to the hypothetical new coin (say there'd be a
demand for such a coin). I am thinking of an alternative mining scheme
where block reward would grow (or decrease) with popularity of the coin.
The rationale behind this idea is to make an exchange rate more stable
since greater interest will not result in higher coin price.
Evidence clearly shows Bitcoin lacks some basic features of money and thus
behaves more like a commodity (read gold). I have been watching the
exchange rate for several months and the volatility simply does not seem to
go away... so it seems like something has to change in order to get a more
stable currency. I am not telling I want Bitcoin to implement this, I fully
understand that a philosophy of "one coin = never changing features" can be
present that is why I also speak about a fork.
Basically there would be no reliance on external data as the network itself
would decide on reward height and everybody node would be free to do so.
Each network node would determine the popularity on its own depending on
various factors (coin valuation/exchange rate, number of transactions and
many others) and basically come up with its own block reward value. It
would then want to see a new block being mined with such reward value. In
case such a block is mined, it will include it in its own chain. There'd be
some %s of tolerance for block reward value so that the system would not
collapse.
I may be completely wrong with my idea but am asking it this was spoken
before and what opinions do developers have.
Regards,
Jan
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.linuxfoundation.org/pipermail/bitcoin-dev/attachments/20131210/38578826/attachment.html>;