I just found peercoin and I am kind of new to cryptocurrencies so please forgive me if my comments are uniformed. I just feel that there has to exist a better way to eliminate spam transactions than to have a transaction fee. Isn’t possible to instead limit the number of transaction a person can make to let say 5 transactions per day? If you have a transaction fee you are basically punishing everyone because some people are bad. Micropayments are also not possible with a transaction fee. Peercoin is however so much better than bitcoin because it has much more inflation built in and better than ripple because the owner does not appear to hold the majority of the coins. In my opinion the problems with bitcoin is the lack of inflation, the abundant volatility and the transaction fee that is paid to miners. Increasing the number of coins (Inflation) is a much better way to compensate miners than having a transaction fee. I also feel that bitcoin is mainly used for speculation (buy and hold) than being used a medium of exchange (payments). The bitcoin crypto currency would benefit from more inflation (increasing in the supply of coins) which would lower the price of bitcoin. The removal of the transaction fee could also be financed in such way. The payment revolution has not begun until everyone (peer to peer and consumer to merchants) can make and receive payments without any fees. A good crypto currency and payment network according to me has to have 7 properties. 1) Decentralized. 2) No transaction fee. 3) A stable price (low volatility). 4) It can be used to buy things in the real world. 5) Liquidity (you can exchange it for fiat at any time) 6) Scalability over time. Not a fixed supply of coins. 7) A high speed and low cost of transaction and verification (to make sure no double spend)
The burnt txn fee is about personalizing costs and socializing rewards. The purpose of cryptocurrency is to overcome the sybil attack. And by that logic, along with the idea that coins mint more coin, you can see that we actually have done exactly what you are looking for. If you replace the concept of a ‘person’ having a limited number of txns per day with a coin have a limited number of free txns per year, you can see that Peercoin very much does exactly what you’re looking for.
Have you heard of 2nd layer transaction services like Lighting? Off-chain networks like these are designed for instantaneous transactions and extremely low fees to the point where micropayments are possible. It is not possible for blockchains to remain decentralized and at the same time handle transaction services for the entire world. It is not scalable because the blockchain size will grow too much in size too fast.
The main idea is that the blockchain is instead used mainly as a secure ledger for account balances and other pieces of data, but instead the majority of transactions get off-loaded onto these 2nd layer networks that service the transaction needs of the blockchain. These 2nd layer networks then use the blockchain as a settlement network. This way you have fast speeds, but also fees so low that they are not bothersome.
Bitcoin thinks it can use this on-chain/off-chain model, but I doubt it will work for them. The reason is because the off-chain networks will then be competing directly with Bitcoin miners for transactions and fees. Bitcoin will have reduced security because miners will no longer be getting the fees they need to remain profitable, thus they will stop mining. Peercoin was designed from the beginning with this model in mind. Peercoin is secured by PoS minters and they do not get paid with transaction fees, thus minters and off-chain networks will not compete with each other and the same level of security can be maintained.
If you want to read my expanded thoughts on this, please read this post…
You are introducing a credit system. The credit in Peercoin is worth 0.01 ppc and can be bought and used with no limit. If you want to limit credit expending to 5 a day for everyone, “you are basically punishing everyone because some people are bad”.
The whole point of cryptocurrencies (in general) is to provide a way to anonymously trade in a decentralized and trustless environment. How do you limit the number of transactions by person, without centralizing the transactions or removing the anonymity?
Wallets can be created even offline, randomically. There is no known way to determine which user created which wallet. There is no “user_id” or “drive license number” appended to your wallet. So there is no way to limit transactions.
That being said, even if it was possible to limit transactions, I don’t think it would be even remotely a good idea.
Transaction fees, when kept relatively low, are not a bad idea. They prevent network flooding, DoS attacks, and other kinds of abuses. Unless you’re buying twenty $1.20 coffees every day, I can’t see why you should be so concerned about fees.
Thank you for your input I forgot that you could mint peer coins. Very cool and I suspect a very unique idea because I haven’t heard of any cryptocurrency that has a similar concept. As I said I am new to peercoin. I just downloaded the wallet and I have not even managed to get it to synchronize yet. Yes, you are right if you get a free number of peercoins each year (by minting which I have not tried yet and I am not even sure what it is) then you are basically getting a fixed number of free transactions per year. Thank you for pointing this out to me
Thank you for your input and taking the time to provide me with knowledge . Yes, I have heard of and briefly looked at lighting. It seems pretty cool! Thank you for explaining that the blockchain can’t handle micro transactions because the ledger will become to large. I my opinion a good crypto currency does not necessarily have to manage micro transactions. I just took micro transactions as an example in order to justify the removal of the transaction fee. Someone pointed out to me that since you get free peercoin through minting (I currently have a very poor understanding what minting really is) then you essentially get a fixed and free number of transactions each year. So I am happy with that.
peercoin introduced proof of stake, and it was unique for peercoin when it was released. Now many coins are using it.
When I opened my ripple wallet on Gatehub https://www.gatehub.net/ I was rewarded with free XRP. I can’t remember how much but it was not very much but I appreciated the generosity. Can’t the peercoin transaction fee (which apparently is important to prevent spam transactions)be neutralized in the same way? Your gatehub wallet is however connected to your identity (passport) so it is quite easy to make sure people don’t open multiple wallets just to get free XRPs. Let say you are allowed to make 20 free transactions per month and the transaction fee is 0.01 peercoins then each wallet should be given 20*0.01 =0.2 peercoins each month for free to neutralize the transaction fee. Also what is your opinion on interest rates? Other crypto currencies such as diamonds https://bit.diamonds/ pays a 25% interest rate on your coins each year. Such high interest rate seems to be a bit excessive. I would not define minting as free peercoin (perfectly neutralizing transactions fees) because according to my understanding it require at least some effort running the software in the background everyday. I am also not sure if you can define minting as a interest rate on your peercoin again because it require effort. Each peercoin wallet could get 0.2 peercoins each month (to neutralize transactions fees) plus a 1% interest per month on the number of peercoins in your wallet. I have no idea if the numbers are realistic, if it is technical feasible or if is a good idea to implement such changes. I am just curious to get some feedback on my ideas. In my opinion all crypto currency needs some sort of reasonable inflation to counterbalance the deflation, hoarding and speculation (Bitcoin). The goal can’t be that a currency should explode in value (making early adopters rich). Over time the goal must be for the currency to have a stable value to make sure it is a good medium of exchange to facilitate transaction between buyer and sellers.
Xrp is centralized, so proof of identity is on the table. A government issued crypto that uses proof of citizenship, for example, could do this. A decentralized blockchain cannot.
Peercoin has 1% per year mint rate and a 0.01 PPC/KB fee. We do not plan to change this.
Good.That’s the essence of peercoin."Peercoin has 1% per year mint rate and a 0.01 PPC/KB fee. "
That “free” xrp you got isn’t really free. It’s just a place holder to keep your gatehub account active. You can’t move it out of the wallet.
According to this recent press release, Sunny King did not invent Proof-of-Stake:
Peercoin doesn’t seem to be getting swept up in the current hype, but it’s a shame that its low profile allows this misinformation to propagate.
Yah, that is pretty blatently false. Sunnyking and Scott Nadal invented PoS.
It does not matter how was first with PoS the fact is that iota has superior technology to peercoin because they allow you to make transactions without any fees. Even though I do appreciate that peercoin as built in inflation and not a fixed number of coins which is very cool.
No fees, but you have to do your own work. Blockchains allow people to transact just by signing and broadcasting with a fee, a much lower burden of participation.
And it certainly matters who was first when someone is claiming they ‘invented’ something a year after it was implented publicly by someone else.
I realize now that I might have been to unfair to peercoin. Even though you have a transaction fee that fee can be neutralized by minting according to my understanding. Even iota require you to do some work (confirm two transactions) to get one free transactions hence the coins appears to work in the same way.
It’s a matter of intellectual honesty.
Another good reason to update Peercoin marketing slogan to include we are first and novel.
It is quite a claim that transactions can be made without fees. The whitepaper is quite hard to read, are they assuming a centralized and trusted setting?
No, they use a new protocol method called ‘tangle’ that I think is still in beta testing. Basically, each person has to do work to verify 2 other people’s txns in order to get their txn verified. So you have to pay work instead of a fee. Same basic principle as PoW and hashcash.