I agree that the distribution can be seen as a weakness in Pos. A facebook pos coin could overnight have airdropped coins over its user base and presto we have a ‘fair’ distribution and off we go.
I dare to counter argue with: remember Google Buzz? Overnight users were forced to buzz each other iso of tweets.
The difference is that twitter’s user base grew naturally whereas buzz account were force upon.
Guess who is still around and whos not…
OK, SO ALL IN ALL, YOU LOVE THE PROPOSAL ;D
This was like walking into a Liverpool bar wearing a Manchester t-shirt!
Seriously, we think collaboration is the way to go. Seems obvious looking at btc’s market cap versus all pos coins put together (and at this constant BTC casino banner ad on peercointalk).
We started this thread to suggest one idea. Not sure why it is so much less popular here than with BTS and NXT, but so be it. Moving on…
We’re still interested in finding things to do that are WIN WIN.
[quote=“Dan Kaufman, post:22, topic:3463”]OK, SO ALL IN ALL, YOU LOVE THE PROPOSAL ;D
This was like walking into a Liverpool bar wearing a Manchester t-shirt!
Seriously, we think collaboration is the way to go. Seems obvious looking at btc’s market cap versus all pos coins put together (and at this constant BTC casino banner ad on peercointalk).
We started this thread to suggest one idea. Not sure why it is so much less popular here than with BTS and NXT, but so be it. Moving on…
We’re still interested in finding things to do that are WIN WIN.[/quote]
May be the users here are not as greedy as those of BTS and NXT 
By the way, it looks like your Neucoin holdings value will be divided by 50 if you don’t mint your coins in the 10 coming years:
Will Neucoin allow cold minting? Do you have any Peerbox equivalent solution available? Or are users supposed to leave their PC on all the time with their wallet opened?
Hi everyone!
Coming back on Sentinelrv’s answer to Dan’s post, as it reflects the sentiment conveyed through other posts: our goal is not to work against you, but to engage with you not just on PoS security (as we’ve been doing thanks to our technical white paper), but also on PoS currency distribution mechanism.
NeuCoin’s key differentiator is to have a consumer approach from the first day it launches - so that any mainstream consumer can use it, and actually wants to use it. This approach is enabled mainly by our distribution model - which itself is supported by NeuCoin’s implementation of PoS. We are indeed forking Peercoin and are grateful for Sunny King’s and this community’s work - and have never been dismissing it.
Having a consumer approach means the following:
[ul][li]Designing an easy-to-use cryptocurrency[/li]
[li]Developing true utility for NeuCoin, making it more useful than existing payment methods on specific use cases - we chose to focus on micropayments[/li]
[li]Being able to fund user acquisition: marketing, as well as a freemium strategy[/li][/ul]
These three elements - NeuCoin’s ease-of-use, utility development and user acquisition strategy - are entirely financed by its premine. This is why our strategy can only be implemented by creating a new cryptocurrency, not on top of an existing pos coin with a different distribution mechanism.
To quickly go back on the numbers: at inception, there will be 3 billion premined NeuCoins. 2.4 billion NeuCoins will be donated to three non-profit foundations which will use them either to fund core code, utility development or user acquisition.
These 2.4 billion NeuCoins will be distributed the following way over time:
Our plan can only be implemented with a cryptocurrency with a “clean slate”: since our strategy is fully supported by our distribution mechanism, we can’t apply it to a cryptocurrency which has already been created and whose distribution plan is already designed.
Looking forward to getting your feedback on this!
[quote=“mably, post:23, topic:3463”]May be the users here are not as greedy as those of BTS and NXT 
By the way, it looks like your Neucoin holdings value will be divided by 50 if you don’t mint your coins in the 10 coming years:
Will Neucoin allow cold minting? Do you have any Peerbox equivalent solution available? Or are users supposed to leave their PC on all the time with their wallet opened?[/quote]
ps - i want to add a message footer here like “don’t hate us for giving neucoins to value adders!” but i’m searching for something catchier
I know some big PPC holders fear of being overtaken by Neucoin and they dare not to face the truth that PPC has no scarcity at all.
Good artists copy, great artists steal!
Apparently quite some people here are not familar with the history of DOS/Macintosh/Microsoft/Apple/Xerox.
XPM holders are as many as PPCer, so give XPMer a Neu chance. :))
Premined 3 Billion Neucoin may be insufficient, I prefer infinite. As long as people can contribute to Neucoin, the old Neucoin holders can vote to produce more Neucoin for them. In my eyes, PoS coins should be “share” not “currency”.
I like neucoins punishment on lazy holders(not mint) very much. One reason why PPC nodes are so few(only several hundreds after 3 years), is the too slight punishment.
4)I predict that Neucoin will overtake PPC within 2015. I’ve told you PPC holders that if you cannot introduce scarce resource(eg USD/BTC) into your system, you have no scarcity at all. Even Primecoin can maintain better scarcity than PPC.
If you airdropped 100% of a new PoS coin in 1-to-1 proportion to a snapshot of bitcoin holdings, that would fit this model even if the new coin were not PoW. Just saying. :)[/quote]
Not really. To have fair distribution people need to have equal opportunities to make an effort to obtain the coin. If you dug out gold from the ground it is fair. If you get some silver for holding some gold, that is not fair.
Neucoin is a premine with very unfair distribution. Not a good starting point for bootstrapping a new coin IMO. My guess is that it will get some traction in the beginning, and then die a slow death after this.
coin money and votes, makes the rich richer.
I am against this stop
peercoin very fair about it, peercoin like a business
[quote=“sabreiib, post:26, topic:3463”]1) I like competition, so Neucoin is wellcomed! Always remember this is free market, it’s ridiculous for Cypherpunk/financial liberalists to restrict the freedom of a new coin’s birth.
I know some big PPC holders fear of being overtaken by Neucoin and they dare not to face the truth that PPC has no scarcity at all.
Good artists copy, great artists steal!
Apparently quite some people here are not familar with the history of DOS/Macintosh/Microsoft/Apple/Xerox.[/quote]
I can’t and don’t want to restrict anyone from using PoS technology for their own use. I would rather these people work with us though. It’s different when you’re a bystander and it’s not happening to you, but when you’re the one being directly copied after all the hard work you’ve put in, it just feels wrong. I guess all that can be done is for us to compete better.
I’ve never completely understood what you were talking about when you were trying to explain that Peercoin has little scarcity, but now I think I do. I read this quote from NuBoats above and it made more sense…
I think I’ve had an aha moment and I’m trying to understand this. Let me try to explain what I see now. With PoS, the only resources needed to secure the network are the coins themselves. In PoW you need high amounts of processing power that can only come from expensive computers and energy use. If an organization or company came along like the Neucoin people and were able to distribute a PoS coin to a much wider amount of people, it means they could overtake us.
The reason is because they would be distributing the resources/coins themselves that are needed to secure the network. As long as they could spread the coins to a large enough amount of people that actually minted with them, they would overtake the Peercoin network. The same thing is impossible to do with a PoW network though, because there is no similar way to distribute the resources to people that are necessary to secure the network. Distributing coin tokens to people to mint with is much easier and cheaper than trying to distribute asics and other mining gear. It’s the very reason why Neucoin could surpass us.
This is not true for Peershares however, because the value of Peershares would be tied to the valuation of a single company. There would be no reason for somebody to create new Peershares around the same company, unless it was the company itself distributing more shares in order to raise more money.
The same is also not true with NuBits, because as you’ve said before, the scarce resources in the Nu system are large amounts of fiat or even Bitcoin. The fiat in Nu is needed in order to provide high amounts of liquidity. Now that the Nu community is working on decentralizing liquidity operations, that means regular people will provide their own money for Nu’s liquidity operations. And they will do this because they’ll receive profit, similar to Bitcoin mining. This fiat/liquidity operation is what ties Nu down in the real world and prevents it from being copied so easily. Just as Bitcoin can’t easily be copied because you can’t distribute asics to people, NuBits can’t easily be copied because you can’t easily replicate its liquidity operations. You would need vast amounts of money in order to do so.
The same can’t be said about Peercoin though. Bitcoin is tied into the real world through Bitcoin mining gear, Peershares is tied to a single company’s valuation and NuBits is tied to its fiat liquidity operation. These three things are scarce resources, which help prevent each system from being easily replicated. There are no scare resources tying Peercoin into the real world and preventing its replication. Facebook or some other huge organization could create a new PoS coin and distribute it to a massive amount of people and as long as these people actually began minting with their coins, they would achieve a much higher network security level and a wider distribution.
There is nothing preventing them from doing this because there is nothing that they are dependent on in the real world. They aren’t dependent on their users having expensive mining computers. They aren’t dependent on their users having access to lots of money for liquidity operations. The only thing they’re dependent on is their users having the coins themselves to mint with, which they can easily and cheaply distribute to people themselves. This means there is pretty much nothing preventing people from replicating Peercoin’s network. As long as they have the resources and connections to do so, it can be copied. The only question in my mind is whether the massive amount of people they distribute coins to will actually mint and secure the network. If not, then this whole argument falls apart and Peercoin remains superior.
Is this what you’ve been trying to say the whole time? Any thoughts, anyone?
This is an interesting point. I believe it’s because Peercoin is not currently a “popular” coin. Those interested to jump to the next “fad” have already left Peercoin long ago, because it has not been a fad for over a year.
I would guess that the Peercoin community is a bit older, a bit more resistant to change, a bit longer-term thinking, a bit quieter, a bit less likely to speculate, and a bit less likely to be scammed, than the average altcoin community. Generally speaking, of course.
Perhaps that explains it, perhaps not. Another factor may be that NeuCoin is a direct PPC clone, hence it could be seen as a more aggressive market share thief than it is toward NXT or BTS, for example.
This is an interesting point. I believe it’s because Peercoin is not currently a “popular” coin. Those interested to jump to the next “fad” have already left Peercoin long ago, because it has not been a fad for over a year.
I would guess that the Peercoin community is a bit older, a bit more resistant to change, a bit longer-term thinking, a bit quieter, a bit less likely to speculate, and a bit less likely to be scammed, than the average altcoin community. Generally speaking, of course.
Perhaps that explains it, perhaps not. Another factor may be that NeuCoin is a direct PPC clone, hence it could be seen as a more aggressive market share thief than it is toward NXT or BTS, for example.[/quote]
I think you hit the nail on the head with both arguments.
What determines the value of money?
We need to discuss this situation
money What is not clear is?
[quote=“levent, post:32, topic:3463”]What determines the value of money?
We need to discuss this situation
money What is not clear is?[/quote]
Money is inextricably linked to every person on this planet, yet rarely does a person ponder how money came to its current state. The populace spends the majority of their time working a job, with the motive to make money. With few people focusing on the importance of money itself, we are left with the current monetary paradigm, one in which money is controlled by nation states and central banks.
The three functions of money are unit of account, medium of exchange, and store of value.
The unit of account has characteristics of being divisible into smaller units and being fungible. This is accomplished with different denominations of notes, and standard currencies that do not differ. Medium of exchange solves the problem of coincidences of wants that the barter system could not solve. Store of value permits that money must not lose considerable value over longer periods of time.
Fiat currencies are able to accomplish all of this effectively, however the store of value has come over threat with the issuers of money inflating the money supply at considerable rates. Even with moderate inflation levels in the United States the depreciation of the value is considerable over longer time frames. This threatens the store of value of money and may lead into problems such as hyperinflation.
Peercoin accomplishes unit of account and medium of exchange well, but struggles with store of value. If we look at the price of Peercoin now it is not a good store of value from where it was a year prior. I remember the Peercoin community advertising Peercoin as a store of value. I can see Peercoin accomplishing store of value through a low inflation rate that is not susceptible to the whims of governmental entities.
Ultimately money relies on perception, the Peseta was once valuable and now worthless as Spain transitioned into the Euro. What was once perceived as valuable is now worthless. Money relies on perception of value.
I do not think Peercoin should focus on being a transactional currency rather a backbone like system where applications are built on top of it.
For example, a blockchain for hosting cryptoproperty. A service comes along that tags the ownership of precious art on to an application run on top of the peercoin blockchain like counterparty or something. This allows the world to see the owner of this piece of art on the public blockchain. It can be used to verfiy ownership and prove transfers or property.
Also, Peercoin to be used as a token for DAO’s dividend distributions. If it can be a token for DAO dividend distributions it will better act as a store of value.
The barrier of entry to replicate Peercoin PoS is incredibly low. A larger network like Facebook could easily copy Peercoin and distribute it to far more people who will perceive this new currency as money. However, there are legal ramifications for a corporation to do this.
Simply a suggestion:
This discussion needs to be moved to it’s own topic.
At the moment, all we’re doing is giving free publicity to Neucoin, and while I appreciate the drop to PPC holders, the amount of the drop they are giving us, the amount of attention their getting is unbalanced.
So let’s find a way to close this thread and re-open a new one without “Neucoin” in the subject, if we’re going to talk about backbone vs transactional situations.
[quote=“ppcman, post:35, topic:3463”]Simply a suggestion:
This discussion needs to be moved to it’s own topic.
At the moment, all we’re doing is giving free publicity to Neucoin, and while I appreciate the drop to PPC holders, the amount of the drop they are giving us, the amount of attention their getting is unbalanced.
So let’s find a way to close this thread and re-open a new one without “Neucoin” in the subject, if we’re going to talk about backbone vs transactional situations.[/quote]
I concur
I think I've had an aha moment and I'm trying to understand this. Let me try to explain what I see now. With PoS, the only resources needed to secure the network are the coins themselves. In PoW you need high amounts of processing power that can only come from expensive computers and energy use. If an organization or company came along like the Neucoin people and were able to distribute a PoS coin to a much wider amount of people, it means they could overtake us.The reason is because they would be distributing the resources/coins themselves that are needed to secure the network. As long as they could spread the coins to a large enough amount of people that actually minted with them, they would overtake the Peercoin network. The same thing is impossible to do with a PoW network though, because there is no similar way to distribute the resources to people that are necessary to secure the network. Distributing coin tokens to people to mint with is much easier and cheaper than trying to distribute asics and other mining gear. It’s the very reason why Neucoin could surpass us.
This is not true for Peershares however, because the value of Peershares would be tied to the valuation of a single company. There would be no reason for somebody to create new Peershares around the same company, unless it was the company itself distributing more shares in order to raise more money.
The same is also not true with NuBits, because as you’ve said before, the scarce resources in the Nu system are large amounts of fiat or even Bitcoin. The fiat in Nu is needed in order to provide high amounts of liquidity. Now that the Nu community is working on decentralizing liquidity operations, that means regular people will provide their own money for Nu’s liquidity operations. And they will do this because they’ll receive profit, similar to Bitcoin mining. This fiat/liquidity operation is what ties Nu down in the real world and prevents it from being copied so easily. Just as Bitcoin can’t easily be copied because you can’t distribute asics to people, NuBits can’t easily be copied because you can’t easily replicate its liquidity operations. You would need vast amounts of money in order to do so.
The same can’t be said about Peercoin though. Bitcoin is tied into the real world through Bitcoin mining gear, Peershares is tied to a single company’s valuation and NuBits is tied to its fiat liquidity operation. These three things are scarce resources, which help prevent each system from being easily replicated. There are no scare resources tying Peercoin into the real world and preventing its replication. Facebook or some other huge organization could create a new PoS coin and distribute it to a massive amount of people and as long as these people actually began minting with their coins, they would achieve a much higher network security level and a wider distribution.
There is nothing preventing them from doing this because there is nothing that they are dependent on in the real world. They aren’t dependent on their users having expensive mining computers. They aren’t dependent on their users having access to lots of money for liquidity operations. The only thing they’re dependent on is their users having the coins themselves to mint with, which they can easily and cheaply distribute to people themselves. This means there is pretty much nothing preventing people from replicating Peercoin’s network. As long as they have the resources and connections to do so, it can be copied. The only question in my mind is whether the massive amount of people they distribute coins to will actually mint and secure the network. If not, then this whole argument falls apart and Peercoin remains superior.
Is this what you’ve been trying to say the whole time? Any thoughts, anyone?
This is exactly what I mean.
However, the network effect barrier should be checked. Fo instance, Neucoin has a very elaborate plan to overtake PPC, such as high minting rewards, free give out and ambitious marketing activity. Even Nubits is in danger because Nubits is an infant now, Neucoin with big investors can easily build up millions USD scale of liquidity and beat Nubits badly since nubits is open source and Neucoin team has more programmers with decent crypto background. Sunny King, sigmike are smart, but don’t forget there are enough smart programmers in this planet, the only issue is how much money to hire them. With big investors, man hours not an issue at all.
Let’s assume Neucoin becomes a big success in 2015, and then facebook wanna issue “facecoin”(PoS) and freely give out to every account initially. Within a short time, facecoin becomes the most security PoS coin with millions of miners. The network effect takes place, facecoin becomes mainstream and leave bitcoin in the dust.
But there are quite some other big companies such as Apple, google, IBM, Microsoft, they can fork facecoin within one week, and people will find they are in a heaven of free PoS coins. Fackbook can even issue a new facecoin 2.0 , 3.0 , 4.0, as they wish, as many versions as they like. Finally government especially china(with 1.3billion people’s ID) wanna issue PoS coin by freely giving out to every person, fair enough, charitable enough. Perhaps the hostile governments just wanna disturb the crypto world.
In front of such PoS flood, could we rebuild gold standard on internet? Within the PoS flood, the PoW bitcoin is shining as gold, because it is rare.
My conclusion is PoS’s only way out is introduce FIAT into their system just like Nubits, after growing up, those “nubits” becomes very strong and can hardly be replaced(still possible, but not easily).
PoS suitable for Hayek thoery where the “nubits type” DAC can maintain stable buying power(anti inflation possible).
PoW suitable for gold standard, to maintain scarcity, in this field, Primecoin outperforms bitcoin(just technically).
No more to be said I believe
Thanks ppcman – I think you were the only (!) person who expressed any interest in free NEU to PPC holders.
But given the overall opposition to this idea expressed here, we won’t be including PPC in this program unless the idea receives more support.
It is amazing how PPC holders have the exact opposite view of that expressed by holders of BTS, NXT and XPY. Truly fascinating from a psychological/sociological perspective.
Other communities are like: “free money? great, thanks!” “You’re spending time and money defending and promoting PoS… thanks!” and “What else can we do together?”
There is something anti-capitalistic, anti- not just Gordon Gekko but also Adam Smith, going on here. A “join our commune or else you’re against us” mentality. At least that is what people are saying out loud.
Hey Dan, we are not kids anymore and we can do whatever we want here 
We sure will have a look at NeuCoin source code as soon as it is released and see how we can improve peercoin from it.
In fact it has already begun as SK has started working on a fix about one of the point described in NeuCoin white paper.
I guess that we will work together on a technical side rather than on the financial side.